Purpose: Real-world evidence comparing surgical techniques for symptomatic hemorrhoidal disease (HD) remains limited, despite the availability of multiple approaches. This study aimed to evaluate short-term, interim outcomes from a prospective, nationwide cohort study that compared the effectiveness of different operative techniques based on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in patients with symptomatic HD. Methods: A prospective, nationwide cohort study was conducted at 20 tertiary care centers across Turkiye between July 2022 and July 2024. Adult patients aged 18 years or older with symptomatic HD (grades I–IV) who underwent surgery during this period were included. The choice of procedure was determined by the operating surgeon, and patients were categorized into excisional, fixative, and ablative groups according to the surgical approach used. The primary outcomes were changes in the Hemorrhoidal Disease Symptom Score, Short Health ScaleHD, visual analog scale for pain, and patient satisfaction, assessed from the preoperative period to postoperative day 7 and postoperative week 6. Results: The study included a total of 315 patients after excluding those who did not fulfil the inclusion criteria. Among them, 239 (78.9%) were male, with a mean age of 43.7±11.7 years. The distribution of patients across surgical groups was 207 (65.7%) in the excisional group, 30 (9.5%) in the fixative group, and 78 (24.8%) in the ablative group. All groups demonstrated significant improvements in PROM scores from preoperative to postoperative assessments. However, no statistically significant differences were observed between groups at any time point for PROM scores or for changes in PROM scores across consecutive evaluations (P≥0.05 for all comparisons). Urinary retention occurred more frequently, and hospital stays were longer in the fixative group (P=0.006 and P<0.001, respectively). The excisional group had a greater need for narcotic use and longer duration of use (P=0.003 and P<0.001, respectively). Conclusion This real-world cohort study shows that all 3 surgical approaches are effective for HD, providing comparable short-term symptomatic relief and patient satisfaction. These techniques appear equally valid treatment options, and the choice of procedure may best be individualized based on patient-specific characteristics and surgeon preference.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05429060

STUDY DESIGN: Single-center, retrospective cohort study. PURPOSE: We aimed to evaluate and compare the clinical outcomes in patients who underwent palliative posterior instrumentation (PPI) versus those who underwent corpectomy with cage reconstruction (CCR) for thoracolumbar pathological fracture. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: The requirement for anterior support after corpectomy has been emphasized in the treatment of pathological fractures of the vertebrae. However, for patients with a relatively short life expectancy, anterior reconstruction may not be required and posterior instrumentation alone may provide adequate stabilization. METHODS: A total of 43 patients with metastases of the thoracolumbar spine underwent surgery in the department of orthopaedic and traumatology of Istanbul University Faculty of Medicine from 2003 to 2016. Surgical outcomes were assessed on the basis of survival status, pre- and postoperative pain, complication rate, and operation time. RESULTS: PPI was performed for 22 patients and CCR was performed for 21 patients. In the PPI group, the follow-up period of the five surviving patients was 32 months. The remaining 17 patients died with a mean survival duration of 12.3 months postoperatively. In the CCR group, the five surviving patients were followed up for an average of 14.1 months. The remaining 16 patients died with a mean survival duration of 18.7 months postoperatively. No statistically significant difference (p=0.812) was noted in the survival duration. The Visual Analog Scale scores of the patients were significantly reduced after both procedures, with no significant difference noted on the basis of the type of surgical intervention (p>0.05). The complication rate in the CCR group (33.3%) was higher compared with that in the PPI group (22.7%); however, this difference was not noted to be statistically significant (p=0.379). The average operation time in the PPI group (149 minutes) was significantly shorter (p=0.04) than that in the CCR group (192 minutes). CONCLUSIONS: The PPI technique can decompress the tumor for functional improvement and can stabilize the spinal structure to provide pain relief.
Cohort Studies ; Follow-Up Studies ; Fractures, Spontaneous ; Humans ; Life Expectancy ; Neoplasm Metastasis ; Pain, Postoperative ; Palliative Care ; Retrospective Studies ; Spine ; Traumatology ; Visual Analog Scale