Stapled hemorrhoidopexy vs. diathermy excision for fourth-degree hemorrhoids: a randomized, clinical trial and review of the literature

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this prospective study was to compare the results of stapled hemorrhoidopexy with those of conventional diathermy excision for controlling symptoms in patients with fourth-degree hemorrhoids.

Methods: Thirty-one patients with symptomatic, prolapsed irreducible piles were randomized to either stapled hemorrhoidopexy (n = 15) or diathermy excision (n = 16). The primary outcome measure was the control of hemorrhoidal symptoms one year after operation.

Results: The two procedures were comparable in terms of pain relief and disappearance of bleeding. Recurrent prolapse starting from the fourth month after operation was confirmed in 8 of 15 patients in the stapled group and in none in the diathermy excision group: two-tailed Fisher's exact test P = 0.002, RR 0.33, 95 percent confidence interval 0.19-0.59). Five of these patients responded well to a later conventional diathermy hemorrhoidectomy. Persistence of itching was reported in six patients in the stapled group and in one of the diathermy excision group (P = 0.03). On the other hand, six patients in the stapled group and none in the diathermy excision group experienced tenesmus (P = 0.007).

Conclusions: Stapled hemorrhoidopexy was not effective as a definitive cure for the symptoms of prolapse and itching in patients with fourth-degree hemorrhoids. Moreover, stapled hemorrhoidopexy induced the appearance of a new symptom, tenesmus, in 40 percent of the patients. Therefore conventional diathermy hemorrhoidectomy should continue to be recommended in patients with symptomatic, prolapsed, irreducible piles.