Comparative study between excisional hemorrhoidectomy and laser hemorrhoidoplasty in third-degree piles | ||||
| The Egyptian Journal of Surgery | ||||
| Volume 41, Issue 4, October 2022 PDF (2.53 MB) | ||||
| DOI: 10.4103/ejs.ejs_311_22 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Authors | ||||
| Mahmoud M.G. Yassin; Mohamed A. Nada; Essam F. Ebeid; Ayman M. Boutrous | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| Background One of the most prevalent benign anorectal conditions is hemorrhoids. It is thought to be the most problematic gastrointestinal illness. Sometimes, they may sag, prolapse, enlarge, and bleed. Aim This is a prospective randomized comparative study to compare excisional hemorrhoidectomy (EH) with laser hemorrhoidoplasty (LHP) in the treatment of symptomatic third-degree piles prospectively. Patients and methods In this study, 60 patients participated. The study participants were split into two groups in a randomized manner. EH was done for 30 patients using the Milligan–Morgan procedure, whereas another 30 patients underwent LHP. Results We compared between the outcomes of LHP with Milligan–Morgan open hemorrhoidectomy in terms of duration of surgery, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative pain, duration of hospital stay, days taken for return to work, and postoperative complications on both short and long runs. Conclusion In the treatment of third-degree piles, LHP was superior to EH by the Milligan–Morgan technique as LHP significantly reduced the length of the procedure, the amount of blood lost during the procedure, and the degree of postoperative pain while having no effect on fecal continence. Regarding postoperative complications, including postoperative hemorrhage, urine retention, stenosis, and recurrence rate, there were statistically nonsignificant differences between both the procedures. | ||||
| Keywords | ||||
| excisional hemorrhoidectomy; Laser hemorrhoidoplasty; third-degree piles | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 104 PDF Download: 125 |
||||
