TY - JOUR
T1 - Transanal Hemorrhoidal Dearterialization With Mucopexy Versus Vessel-Sealing Device Hemorrhoidectomy for Grade III to IV Hemorrhoids
T2 - Long-term Outcomes From the THDLIGA Randomized Controlled Trial
AU - Trenti, Loris
AU - Biondo, Sebastiano
AU - Espin-Basany, Eloy
AU - Barrios, Oriana
AU - Sanchez-Garcia, Jose L.
AU - Landaluce-Olavarria, Aitor
AU - Bermejo-Marcos, Elena
AU - Garcia-Martinez, Maria T.
AU - Alias Jimenez, David
AU - Jimenez, Fernando
AU - Alonso, Adolfo
AU - Manso, Maria B.
AU - Kreisler, Esther
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© The American Society of Colon & Rectal Surgeons, Inc. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
PY - 2023/8/1
Y1 - 2023/8/1
N2 - BACKGROUND: Both transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization and vessel-sealing device hemorrhoidectomy are safe for grade III to IV hemorrhoid treatment. Whether one of them is superior regarding long-term results remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: To compare long-term results after transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization and vessel-sealing device hemorrhoidectomy. DESIGN: Multicenter randomized controlled trial. SETTINGS: This study was conducted at 6 centers. PATIENTS: Patients ≥18 years of age with grade III to IV hemorrhoids were included in the study. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization (n = 39) or vessel-sealing device hemorrhoidectomy (n = 41). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was hemorrhoid symptom recurrence assessed by a specific questionnaire 2 years postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included long-term complications, reoperations, fecal continence, and patient satisfaction and quality of life. RESULTS: Five of the 80 patients included in the study were lost to follow-up. Thirty-six patients randomly assigned to transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization and 39 patients randomly assigned to vessel-sealing device hemorrhoidectomy were included in the long-term analysis. The differences between mean baseline and mean 2-year score in the 2 groups were similar (-11.0, SD 3.8 vs -12.5, SD 3.6; p = 0.080). Three patients in the transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization group underwent supplementary procedures for hemorrhoid symptoms, compared with none in the vessel-sealing device hemorrhoidectomy group (p = 0.106). Four patients in the vessel-sealing hemorrhoidectomy group and none in the transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization group experienced chronic opened wound (p = 0.116). LIMITATIONS: Lack of stratification for hemorrhoid grade and power calculation based on the main outcome trial but not on the end point of this long-term study. CONCLUSIONS: Transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization with mucopexy is associated with hemorrhoid symptom recurrence similar to vessel-sealing device hemorrhoidectomy at 2 years.
AB - BACKGROUND: Both transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization and vessel-sealing device hemorrhoidectomy are safe for grade III to IV hemorrhoid treatment. Whether one of them is superior regarding long-term results remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: To compare long-term results after transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization and vessel-sealing device hemorrhoidectomy. DESIGN: Multicenter randomized controlled trial. SETTINGS: This study was conducted at 6 centers. PATIENTS: Patients ≥18 years of age with grade III to IV hemorrhoids were included in the study. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization (n = 39) or vessel-sealing device hemorrhoidectomy (n = 41). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was hemorrhoid symptom recurrence assessed by a specific questionnaire 2 years postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included long-term complications, reoperations, fecal continence, and patient satisfaction and quality of life. RESULTS: Five of the 80 patients included in the study were lost to follow-up. Thirty-six patients randomly assigned to transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization and 39 patients randomly assigned to vessel-sealing device hemorrhoidectomy were included in the long-term analysis. The differences between mean baseline and mean 2-year score in the 2 groups were similar (-11.0, SD 3.8 vs -12.5, SD 3.6; p = 0.080). Three patients in the transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization group underwent supplementary procedures for hemorrhoid symptoms, compared with none in the vessel-sealing device hemorrhoidectomy group (p = 0.106). Four patients in the vessel-sealing hemorrhoidectomy group and none in the transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization group experienced chronic opened wound (p = 0.116). LIMITATIONS: Lack of stratification for hemorrhoid grade and power calculation based on the main outcome trial but not on the end point of this long-term study. CONCLUSIONS: Transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization with mucopexy is associated with hemorrhoid symptom recurrence similar to vessel-sealing device hemorrhoidectomy at 2 years.
KW - Hemorrhoidal disease
KW - Long-term outcomes
KW - Transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization
KW - Vessel-sealing device hemorrhoidectomy
KW - Hemorrhoidal disease
KW - Long-term outcomes
KW - Transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization
KW - Vessel-sealing device hemorrhoidectomy
KW - Hemorrhoidal disease
KW - Long-term outcomes
KW - Transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization
KW - Vessel-sealing device hemorrhoidectomy
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85165546464&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/DCR.0000000000002272
DO - 10.1097/DCR.0000000000002272
M3 - Article
C2 - 35239526
AN - SCOPUS:85165546464
SN - 0012-3706
VL - 66
SP - E818-E825
JO - Diseases of the Colon and Rectum
JF - Diseases of the Colon and Rectum
IS - 8
ER -