Varma J S, Chung S C, Li A K
Department of Surgery, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Prince of Wales Hospital, Shatin, New Territories.
Int J Colorectal Dis. 1991 Feb;6(1):42-5. doi: 10.1007/BF00703960.
The feasibility and early results of a new technique of outpatient proctoscopic coagulation of haemorrhoids by means of an electronic probe (Ultroid, Microvasive Inc., USA) were evaluated in comparison to conventional injection sclerotherapy. Age, symptom and sex-matched groups were analysed before and 6 weeks after outpatient treatment, using scoring systems (n = 51). A mean of 6.2 +/- 0.4 ml of phenol in oil were injected over 2.4 +/- 0.2 min compared to a mean current of 15.8 +/- 0.2 mA over a period of 11.9 +/- 0.8 min (p less than 0.001, treatment time). Sclerotherapy was found significantly less tedious than coagulation. More patients complained of discomfort during coagulation, but the difference in tolerance scores between the 2 groups was not significant. Three patients in the coagulation group but none in the injection group refused to be treated by the same method again due to discomfort. Significant benefits were achieved by both modes of treatment after 6 weeks. The early cure rates for bleeding were 84% for sclerotherapy and 64% for coagulation (p = 0.2) and for prolapse 56% and 44% respectively (p = 0.72). Injection sclerotherapy is preferable to Ultroid coagulation for the outpatient treatment of haemorrhoids because it is a quicker, less tedious and more comfortable procedure with equally effective early results.
通过电子探头（美国微创公司的Ultroid）对痔疮进行门诊直肠镜下凝血的新技术的可行性和早期结果与传统注射硬化疗法进行了比较评估。在门诊治疗前和治疗6周后，使用评分系统对年龄、症状和性别匹配的组进行分析（n = 51）。与在11.9±0.8分钟内平均电流为15.8±0.2毫安相比，在2.4±0.2分钟内平均注入6.2±0.4毫升油中苯酚（治疗时间，p<0.001）。发现硬化疗法比凝血明显不那么繁琐。更多患者在凝血过程中抱怨不适，但两组之间的耐受评分差异不显著。凝血组有3名患者因不适拒绝再次接受相同方法治疗，而注射组无患者拒绝。6周后两种治疗方式均取得了显著疗效。硬化疗法治疗出血的早期治愈率为84%，凝血为64%（p = 0.2）；治疗脱垂的早期治愈率分别为56%和44%（p = 0.72）。对于痔疮的门诊治疗，注射硬化疗法优于Ultroid凝血，因为它是一种更快、更不繁琐且更舒适的程序，早期效果同样有效。
