Is routine pathologic evaluation of hemorrhoidectomy specimens necessary?

To confirm that systematic histological study of hemorrhoidectomy specimens is useless, as is proposed by the French Society of Coloproctology (Société Nationale Française de Colo-Proctologie) under the sponsorship of the French National Health Accreditation and Evaluation Agency (Agence Nationale d'Accréditation et d'Evaluation en Santé).

Retrospective histological analysis of hemorrhoidectomy specimens obtained in a coloproctology unit between January 1, 1985 and December 31, 2001.

We found 56 histological abnormalities (0.69%) among 8153 hemorrhoidectomy specimens considered normal at gross examination, with three cases of intraepithelial neoplasia of the anal canal (0.04%) and four cases of severe dysplasia (0.05%). Specimens associated with anal fissure (N = 906) or suppuration (N = 610) did not display more histological lesions. For all patients, the initial surgical resection prevented recurrence.

Routine pathological evaluation of hemorrhoidectomy specimens is not useful and is expensive. All operating procedures in proctology should reflect this attitude. It is nevertheless advisable to select for gross and microscopic evaluation any suspicious areas noticed at the preoperative examination or during the procedure.