Castellví J, Sueiras A, Espinosa J, Vallet J, Gil V, Pi F
Department of Surgery, Hospital de Viladecans, E-08840 Viladecans, Barcelona, Spain.
Int J Colorectal Dis. 2009 Sep;24(9):1011-8. doi: 10.1007/s00384-009-0715-1. Epub 2009 Apr 25.
We evaluate the safety and efficacy of a spinal anesthesia with lidocaine versus a local anesthesia of pudendal block with ropivacaine combined with intravenous sedation in the hemorrhoidectomy procedure and also we compared the short- and long-term efficacy of conventional diathermy versus Ligasure diathermy hemorrhoidectomy.
Seventy-four patients of grade III or IV hemorrhoids were randomized to conventional diathermy hemorrhoidectomy under spinal (n = 19) or local anesthesia (n = 18) and Ligasure diathermy hemorrhoidectomy under spinal (n = 17) or local anesthesia (n = 20). Time of follow-up was 12 months.
Patients operated under local anesthesia had less pain (p < 0.01), less analgesic requirements (p < 0.001), shorter hospital stay (p < 0.01), and less postoperative complications (p < 0.05). A shorter operating time (p < 0.001) and less complications at 4 months postoperatively (p < 0.05) was observed in the Ligasure group, but differences at 12 months were not found.
Hemorrhoidectomy under local anesthesia with pudendal block with ropivacaine and sedation reduced postoperative pain, analgesic requirements, and postoperative complications, and can be performed as day-case procedure. Ligasure diathermy hemorrhoidectomy reduced operating time and was equally effective than conventional diathermy in long-term symptom control.
我们评估在痔切除术过程中,利多卡因脊髓麻醉与罗哌卡因阴部神经阻滞联合静脉镇静局部麻醉的安全性和有效性,并且我们还比较了传统透热疗法与结扎速血管闭合系统透热疗法痔切除术的短期和长期疗效。
74例Ⅲ级或Ⅳ级痔疮患者被随机分为接受脊髓麻醉(n = 19)或局部麻醉(n = 18)下的传统透热疗法痔切除术,以及脊髓麻醉(n = 17)或局部麻醉(n = 20)下的结扎速血管闭合系统透热疗法痔切除术。随访时间为12个月。
接受局部麻醉手术的患者疼痛较轻(p < 0.01),镇痛需求较少(p < 0.001),住院时间较短(p < 0.01),术后并发症较少(p < 0.05)。结扎速血管闭合系统组观察到手术时间较短(p < 0.001),术后4个月并发症较少(p < 0.05),但12个月时未发现差异。
罗哌卡因阴部神经阻滞联合镇静的局部麻醉下痔切除术可减轻术后疼痛、镇痛需求和术后并发症,并且可作为日间手术进行。结扎速血管闭合系统透热疗法痔切除术缩短了手术时间,在长期症状控制方面与传统透热疗法同样有效。