Related Experiment Videos
Survey of hemorrhoidectomy practices: open versus closed techniques
Diseases of the Colon and Rectum
|November 1, 1979
Summary
Surgical treatment for hemorrhoidal disease, particularly with prolapse, showed significant variations in healing time and complications. The closed technique did not offer advantages in pain, recovery, or hospital stay compared to other methods.
Area of Science:
- Colorectal Surgery
- Gastroenterology
- Surgical Outcomes
Background:
- Hemorrhoidal disease is a common condition requiring surgical intervention.
- Establishing clear criteria and evaluating surgical outcomes is crucial for patient care.
Purpose of the Study:
- To establish criteria and evaluate the results of surgical treatment for hemorrhoidal disease.
- To compare outcomes between different surgical techniques for hemorrhoids.
Main Methods:
- A questionnaire was distributed to members of the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons.
- Data from 445 surgeons were tabulated to analyze surgical treatment criteria and outcomes.
- The most frequent indication for surgery was internal and external hemorrhoids with mucosal prolapse.
Main Results:
- Significant differences were observed in complete healing time, wound dehiscence, postoperative stenosis, and infection rates.
- The study found no evidence that the closed technique resulted in less pain, fewer complications, shorter hospital stays, or earlier return to work.
Conclusions:
- Surgical treatment for hemorrhoidal disease with mucosal prolapse yields variable outcomes.
- The closed surgical technique for hemorrhoids does not appear to offer superior results regarding pain, complications, or recovery time.