Background: Hemorrhoidectomy is considered the most efficient method to treat hemorrhoids of III and IV grades. The aim of this study was to compare conventional diathermy hemorrhoidectomy and radiofrequency hemorrhoidectomy based on a large series of patients.
Methods: Between June 2001 and June 2014, 1000 patients have been treated with radiofrequency hemorrhoidectomy (group A) and 500 patients have been treated with diathermy (group B) as a day-case procedure. Operating time, postoperative pain score, hospital stay, early and late postoperative complications, wound healing time and time to return to normal activities were assessed.
Results: The mean follow-up was seven years. The mean operating time for radiofrequency hemorrhoidectomy was shorter than diathermy but not significantly. Patients treated with radiofrequency had significantly less postoperative pain (measured on a Visual Analogue Scale; P=0.001), a shorter wound healing time, less time off work and postoperative complications (P=0.001) than patients who had diathermy. Neither wound healing nor mean hospital stay (day-case surgery) was significantly different.
Conclusions: Radiofrequency hemorrhoidectomyis a valid alternative to the conventional diathermy technique, due to the reduction of operative time, postoperative pain, early and late complication rate.