Purpose: Haemorrhoidal disease is one of the most common anorectal disorders. The aim of this study is to compare the results, over the last 10 years, of stapled haemorrhoidopexy (SH) with those of standard Milligan-Morgan haemorrhoidectomy (M&M). Furthermore, we discuss the proper indications for each technique in terms of the lowest rate of complications and long-term results.
Methods: Three hundred forty-three patients with different degrees of symptomatic haemorrhoids underwent SH or M&M from January 2005 to December 2007. Patients were divided into two groups, age and sex matched. The administration of painkillers drugs, antibiotics and laxatives, complication symptoms and hospital stay in all the patients were recorded after surgical treatment.
Results: The mean operative time was shorter in the stapled group compared to that in the open group (31 min versus 40 min). Postoperative pain, hospital stay and return to full activity were shorter in the stapled group. There was a significant difference in the wound healing time between the two groups. We noticed a higher rate of recurrence in patients treated with stapled haemorrhoidectomy for fourth-degree haemorrhoids.
Conclusions: According to our experience, the Longo technique is indicated for the treatment of haemorrhoids of second- and third degree. In the latter grades of prolapse, the Milligan-Morgan haemorrhoidectomy can also be applied with good outcomes. We believe that, in case of irreducible prolapse, the M&M is to be preferred. However, operative management varies according to surgeon's interest and is tailored to meet the individual patient's need.