[Procedure for prolapse and hemorrhoids versus stapled transanal rectal resection in the treatment of grade IV hemorrhoids].
K Shen,C Wang,Z D Gao,K W Jiang,Y L Wang,Y J Ye
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.1671-0274.2019.12.012
2019-01-01
Abstract:Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of two procedures in the treatment of hemorrhoid: the procedure for prolapse and hemorrhoids (PPH) and stapled transanal rectal resection (STARR). Methods: A retrospective cohort research was conducted. Clinical data of 263 patients undergoing the first elective surgery for grade IV hemorrhoids by the same team of surgeons at our department from January 2015 to December 2016 were analyzed retrospectively, while those had other anorectal diseases, emergency surgery, inflammatory bowel disease, tumor and incomplete clinical data were excluded. PPH was performed in 129 patients and STARR was performed in 134 patients. PPH procedure: a circular purse 2-0 string suture was made at 4 cm above the dentate line; in accordance with the standard protocol, the PPH circular stapling devicewas introduced; the suture was closed, and a pull-through followed; the traction was continued; the stapler was fired; the prolapsed mucosa and submucosa were removed. STARR procedure: 3-5 needles were sutured in the anterior rectal mucosa, protecting the posterior wall mucosa; with the help of a finger the PPH stapler was inserted into the vaginal lumen; the sutures were hooked from both sides of the stapler to maintain traction; according to the disease condition, the suturewas tightened appropriately; stapler was screwed and activated; the anterior wall mucosa was removed; the joint of the both ends of anastomosis was cut; the posterior wall mucosa was removed as well. The short-term efficacy, surgical safety and prognosis of the two groups were compared. Results: There were 67 males (51.9%) in the PPH group and 57 (42.5%) males in the STARR group. The median age of the two groups was 51.0 (22.0, 80.0) years and 49.0 (24.0, 74.0) years, respectively. There were no significant differences in the baseline data between the two groups (all P>0.05). No significant differences in the intraoperative bleeding, length of hospital stay, postoperative analgesic drug use, postoperative bleeding, postoperative infection, etc. were found between two groups (all P>0.05). As compared to PPH group, STAAR group had longer operation time and higher hospitalization cost with significant differences [(44.0±19.3) minutes vs. (26.3±8.5) minutes, t=9.701, P=0.001; (11 047±473) yuan vs. (7674±309) yuan, t=32.826, P=0.001]. One case in STAAR group developed rectovaginal fistula. The median follow-up period of the whole group was 40 (33, 52) months. A total of 108 cases in STARR group and 114 cases in PPH group completed the follow-up. The 3-year disease-relapse rate was 0 in STARR group and 4.2% in PPH group (P=0.042). Conclusion: STARR procedure can improve the prognosis in the treatment of grade IV hemorrhoid, but attention should be paid to the development of complications.