The safety and efficacy of stapled hemorrhoidectomy in the treatment of hemorrhoids: a systematic review and meta-analysis of ten randomized control trials

Abstract

Aims: The objective of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy outcomes of stapled hemorrhoidectomy (PPH) with Milligan-Morgan hemorrhoidectomy (MMH) in the treatment of severe hemorrhoids.

Methods: A meta-analysis pooled the effects of the safety and efficacy outcomes on PPH, and MMH in ten randomized control trials was presented using a fixed effects model or a random effects model (via RevMan Version 4.2).

Results: There was reasonably clear evidence in favor of PPH for operating time, length of hospital stay, pain, anal discharge, and patient satisfaction. However, skin tags and prolapse occurred at higher rates in the PPH group. PPH was not more superior than MMH as to postoperative bleeding, urinary retention, difficulty in defecating, anal fissure and stenosis, sphincter damage, resumption of normal activities, incontinence, pruritus, anal resting and squeeze pressures, and analgesia.

Conclusions: PPH may be at least as safe as MMH. However, the efficacy of PPH compared with MMH could not be determined absolutely. More rigorous studies with longer follow-up periods and larger sample sizes need to be conducted.