Safety and Effectiveness of Tailored Hemorrhoidectomy in Outpatients Setting

Introduction: Single or double prolapsed pile instead of full muco-hemorrhoidal prolapse is a common finding in patients with symptomatic III or IV degree hemorrhoids. For this selected group of patients, relief of symptoms could be achieved by managing the single/double prolapsed piles instead of p...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inFrontiers in surgery Vol. 8; p. 708051
Main Authors Tomasicchio, Giovanni, Martines, Gennaro, Lantone, Giuliano, Dibra, Rigers, Trigiante, Giuseppe, De Fazio, Michele, Picciariello, Arcangelo, Altomare, Donato Francesco, Rinaldi, Marcella
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Frontiers Media S.A 16.08.2021
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Introduction: Single or double prolapsed pile instead of full muco-hemorrhoidal prolapse is a common finding in patients with symptomatic III or IV degree hemorrhoids. For this selected group of patients, relief of symptoms could be achieved by managing the single/double prolapsed piles instead of performing traditional hemorrhoidectomy. The aim of this single-center study was to evaluate the safety and medium- and long-term effectiveness of an outpatient tailored Milligan-Morgan hemorrhoidectomy (MMH) performed under local anesthesia (LA). Material and methods: Clinical records of 202 patients submitted to outpatient tailored MMH, under LA and without anal dilation, treated between 2013 and 2020, were retrospectively reviewed using a prospectively maintained database and completed by a telephone interview or outpatient consultation. Postoperative pain score, the need for painkillers, postoperative complications and symptoms recurrence, return to working activities, and patient grading assessment scale were recorded. Results: Thirty-five (17%) out of 202 patients recruited were lost to the follow-up. One hundred and fifty-two and 15 patients underwent a single and double pile hemorrhoidectomy, respectively. With regard to postoperative outcomes, visual analogue scale (VAS) decreased from a median value of 4 [interquartile range (IQR) 2–6] on the day of surgery to 1 (IQR 0–4) on the 10th postoperative day ( p < 0.001). Sixty-one patients (37%) needed oral painkillers during the 1st week after surgery. There was no mortality or major postoperative complication. Bleeding requiring hospital readmission was reported in seven (4%) patients, and one patient underwent emergency surgery with no need for blood transfusion. No postoperative urinary retention, anal incontinence, or stricture occurred in the series. During the median follow-up of 39 (IQR 12–60) months, 26 patients (16%) reported symptoms of recurrence but only six underwent traditional MMH. Recovery to normal activity occurred within a median period of 6 days (IQR 3–10) and the Clinical Patient Grading Assessment Scale (CPGAS) at 1 year after surgery was reported to be a “good deal better.” Conclusions: Tailored MMH performed under LA in an ambulatory setting can be considered a safe and effective technique with high compliance and satisfaction of patients.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
This article was submitted to Visceral Surgery, a section of the journal Frontiers in Surgery
Edited by: Stéphanie Breukink, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Netherlands
Reviewed by: Ezio Falletto, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino, Italy; Giuseppe Sammarco, University of Catanzaro, Italy; Triantafyllos Doulias, Colchester Hospital University NHS Foundation Trust, United Kingdom; Aldo Infantino, Santa Maria degli Angeli Hospital Pordenone, Italy
ISSN:2296-875X
2296-875X
DOI:10.3389/fsurg.2021.708051