Comparison of efficacy between procedure for prolapse and hemorrhoids and open hemorrhoidectomy.
- Author:
Chao-wen CHEN
1
;
Xue-bin ZHAN
;
Li-jun NIU
;
Wei-hua ZHANG
;
Ya-li TAO
;
Fang ZHAO
;
Tong-lin ZHANG
;
Jing-qiao LU
Author Information
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- MeSH: Adult; Aged; Digestive System Surgical Procedures; methods; Female; Hemorrhoids; surgery; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Surveys and Questionnaires; Treatment Outcome
- From: Chinese Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery 2006;9(3):241-243
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVETo compare the results of procedure for prolapse and hemorrhoids (PPH) and open hemorrhoidectomy.
METHODSA standard questionnaire was given to all patients after PPH or open hemorrhoidectomy from March 2001 to March 2004. In combination with proctological examination, the results including symptoms relief and recurrence were compared between the two groups.
RESULTSThere were 184 effective questionnaires, including 96 cases in PPH group and 88 in open hemorrhoidectomy group. PPH and open hemorrhoidectomy both relieved prolapse (92.7% vs 96.8%, P=0.282), bleeding (91% vs 81%, P=0.241) and pain (91.7% vs 91.5%, P=0.977). There were no statistical differences in the overall complication rate (30.2% and 29.5%, P=0.923) and recurrence rate (21.8% vs 20.5%, P=0.814) between the two groups. The overall satisfactory degree was 87.5% in PPH group and 84.8% in open hemorrhoidectomy group (P=0.218).
CONCLUSIONPPH is a safe and effective option for prolapsed hemorrhoids compared with open hemorrhoidectomy.
