Selective Hemorrhoidal Dearterialization with High Mucopexy in the Surgical Treatment of Hemorrhoidal Disease

Imagem de Miniatura
Arquivos
art_DRAGO_Selective_Hemorrhoidal_Dearterialization_with_High_Mucopexy_in_the_2021.PDF (1.43 MB)
Citações na Scopus
0
Tipo de produção
article
Data de publicação
2021
DOI
SciELO
Scopus
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título do Volume
Editora
Sociedade Brasileira de Coloproctologia
Autores
ROTTA, Carlos Mateus
DRAGO, Stephanie
MARTINEZ, Carlos Augusto Real
BERNARDINO, Marjorie Cristina da Cruz
Citação
JOURNAL OF COLOPROCTOLOGY (RIO DE JANEIRO), v.41, n.3, p.234-241, 2021
Projetos de Pesquisa
Unidades Organizacionais
Fascículo
Resumo
Abstract The doppler-guided transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization technique associated with mucopexy is a noninvasive surgical option used to treat hemorrhoidal disease (HD). Objective To compare and analyze the results using a variation of the doppler-guided transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization technique with the technique of selective hemorrhoidal dearterialization with high mucopexy in the treatment of HD. Method A total of 292 patients who underwent surgical treatment for grade II, III and IV HD from March 2012 to December 2017 were studied. From this total, 110 (37.6%) patients underwent a conventional doppler-guided transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization with mucopexy (CD), and 182 (62.3%) underwent selective hemorrhoidal dearterialization with highmucopexy (SHeLF). In the group of patients undergoing CD, 4 patients (3.64%) had grade II HD, 82 (74.55%) grade III, and 24 (21.82%) grade IV. In the group submitted to SHeLF, 18 (9.89%) patients had grade II HD, 86 (47.25%) had grade III, and 65 (35.71%) had grade IV. The same surgeon operated all patients under spinal anesthesia. In patients undergoing CD, six arterial branches have been dearterialized, while in patients undergoing SHeLF, the hemorrhoidary nipples submitted to a dearterialization were selected (from 1 to 5) by intraoperative evaluation followed by high rectal mucopexy. In the postoperative period, the following parameters were evaluated: pain, tenesmus, bleeding, and recurrence. Moderate results to severe pain was a postoperative complaint reported by 13 (11.82%) patients undergoing CD, and by 19 (10.44%) undergoing SHeLF. Intense tenesmus was reported by 26 (23.64%) patients undergoing CD and by 7 (3.85%) undergoing SHeLF. Three patients (2.73%) undergoing CD and 1 (0.55%) undergoing SHeLF evolved with postoperative bleeding. One patient (0.55%) in the group undergoing CD required surgical review of hemostasis. Six patients (5.45%) who underwent CD and 8 (4.39%) who underwent SHeLF were reoperated due to disease recurrence. Conclusion Comparing statistics, patients undergoing the SHeLF technique have less postoperative pain, tenesmus and postoperative bleeding when compared with CD.
Palavras-chave
hemorrhoids, hemorrhoids/surgery, hemorrhoidectomy, ligation, ultrasonography, doppler, pulsed, transanal endoscopic surgery
URI
https://observatorio.fm.usp.br/handle/OPI/42939
Referências
  1. Altomare D F, 2006, Tech Coloproctol, V10, P181, DOI 10.1007/s10151-006-0277-y
  2. Bellio G, 2018, DIS COLON RECTUM, V61, P491, DOI 10.1097/DCR.0000000000001025
  3. Cantero Ramon, 2008, Cir Esp, V83, P252
  4. Cataldo P, 2005, DIS COLON RECTUM, V48, P189, DOI 10.1007/s10350-004-0921-4
  5. Davis BR, 2018, Rectum, V61, P284
  6. Ed Goligher JC, 1983, Surgery of the anus, rectum and colon. 5. Aufl age
  7. FERGUSON J A, 1959, Dis Colon Rectum, V2, P176, DOI 10.1007/BF02616713
  8. Ferrandis C, 2020, TECH COLOPROCTOL, V24, P165, DOI 10.1007/s10151-019-02136-1
  9. Giordano P, 2011, TECH COLOPROCTOL, V15, P67, DOI 10.1007/s10151-010-0667-z
  10. Gupta PJ, 2011, TECH COLOPROCTOL, V15, P439, DOI 10.1007/s10151-011-0780-7
  11. JOHANSON JF, 1990, GASTROENTEROLOGY, V98, P380, DOI 10.1016/0016-5085(90)90828-O
  12. Kaidar-Person O, 2007, J AM COLL SURGEONS, V204, P102, DOI 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2006.08.022
  13. Lienert M, 2004, DEUT MED WOCHENSCHR, V129, P947, DOI 10.1055/s-2004-823061
  14. Longo A, 1998, 6TH WORLD CONGRESS OF ENDOSCOPIC SURGERY, PTS 1 AND 2, P777
  15. Milligan ETC, 1937, LANCET, V2, P1119
  16. MORINAGA K, 1995, AM J GASTROENTEROL, V90, P610
  17. Pol RA, 2010, DIGEST SURG, V27, P279, DOI 10.1159/000280020
  18. Ratto C, 2011, TECH COLOPROCTOL, V15, P191, DOI 10.1007/s10151-011-0689-1
  19. Ratto C, 2017, TECH COLOPROCTOL, V21, P953, DOI 10.1007/s10151-017-1726-5
  20. Rotta Carlos Mateus, 2019, J. Coloproctol. (Rio J.), V39, P211, DOI 10.1016/j.jcol.2019.04.001
  21. Rotta Carlos Mateus, 2012, J. Coloproctol. (Rio J.), V32, P372
  22. Zagriadskii E A, 2009, Khirurgiia (Mosk), P52

Coleções
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - HC/ICHC