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

PURPOSE: The current study aims to analyze the risk factors for the failure of ileostomy reversal after laparoscopic low anterior resection for rectal cancer. METHODS: All patients who underwent a laparoscopic low anterior resection for rectal cancer with a diverting ileostomy between 2007 and 2014 were abstracted. The patients who underwent and did not undergo a diverting ileostomy procedure were compared regarding patient, tumor, treatment related parameters, and survival. RESULTS: Among 160 (103 males [64.4%], mean [± standard deviation] age was 58.1 ± 11.9 years) patients, stoma reversal was achieved in 136 cases (85%). Anastomotic stricture (n = 13, 52.4%) was the most common reason for stoma reversal. These were the risk factors for the failure of stoma reversal: Male sex (P = 0.035), having complications (P = 0.01), particularly an anastomotic leak (P < 0.001), or surgical site infection (P = 0.019) especially evisceration (P = 0.011), requirement for reoperation (P = 0.003) and longer hospital stay (P = 0.004). Multivariate analysis revealed that male sex (odds ratio [OR], 7.82; P = 0.022) and additional organ resection (OR, 6.71; P = 0.027) were the risk factors. Five-year survival rates were similar (P = 0.143). CONCLUSION: Fifteen percent of patients cannot receive a stoma reversal after laparoscopic low anterior resection for rectal cancer. Anastomotic stricture is the most common reason for the failure of stoma takedown. Having complications, particularly an anastomotic leak and the necessity of reoperation, limits the stoma closure rate. Male sex and additional organ resection are the risk factors for the failure in multivariate analyses. These patients require a longer hospitalization period, but have similar survival rates as those who receive stoma closure procedure.
Anastomotic Leak ; Constriction, Pathologic ; Hospitalization ; Humans ; Ileostomy* ; Laparoscopy ; Length of Stay ; Male ; Multivariate Analysis ; Rectal Neoplasms* ; Reoperation ; Risk Factors ; Surgical Wound Infection ; Survival Rate