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

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.