Loading…
Randomised controlled trial between stapled circumferential mucosectomy and conventional circular hemorrhoidectomy in advanced hemorrhoids with external mucosal prolapse
Background: This randomized prospective study compared the outcome of circular hemorrhoidectomy according to the Hospital Leopold Bellan (HLB) technique (Paris) with Longo stapled circumferential mucosectomy (LSCM) in two homogeneous groups of patients affected by circular fourth-degree hemorrhoids...
Saved in:
| Published in: | The American journal of surgery 2001-07, Vol.182 (1), p.64-68 |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Subjects: | |
| Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
| Online Access: | Get full text |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c419t-82152fa41c0d65b2997e00e46e3d97eb3709cf0d1c8e44dc1e1d9ab48135effa3 |
|---|---|
| cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c419t-82152fa41c0d65b2997e00e46e3d97eb3709cf0d1c8e44dc1e1d9ab48135effa3 |
| container_end_page | 68 |
| container_issue | 1 |
| container_start_page | 64 |
| container_title | The American journal of surgery |
| container_volume | 182 |
| creator | Boccasanta, Paolo Capretti, Pier Giuseppe Venturi, Marco Cioffi, Ugo De Simone, Matilde Salamina, Giovanni Contessini-Avesani, Ettore Peracchia, Alberto |
| description | Background: This randomized prospective study compared the outcome of circular hemorrhoidectomy according to the Hospital Leopold Bellan (HLB) technique (Paris) with Longo stapled circumferential mucosectomy (LSCM) in two homogeneous groups of patients affected by circular fourth-degree hemorrhoids with external mucosal prolapse.
Methods: From December 1996 to December 1999, 80 consecutive patients with fourth-degree hemorrhoids and external mucosal prolapse were randomly assigned to two groups. Forty patients (group A: 18 men, 22 women, mean age 50.5 years, range 21 to 82) underwent HLB hemorrhoidectomy, and 40 patients (group B: 15 men, 25 women, mean age 51.0 years, range 29 to 92) underwent LSCM. Before surgery, all patients were selected with a standard questionnaire for symptom evaluation, full proctological examination, flexible rectosigmoidoscopy, dynamic defecography, and anorectal manometry. No significant differences among the two groups were found. All patients were controlled with follow-up questionnaire and with clinical examination at 1, 2, 4, 12, and 54 weeks after the operation. A postoperative manometry was performed 3 months after surgery.
Results: The length of the operation was significantly lower in group B (25 ± 3.1 SD versus 50 ± 5.3 minutes,
P |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1016/S0002-9610(01)00654-7 |
| format | article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_71137391</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0002961001006547</els_id><sourcerecordid>71137391</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c419t-82152fa41c0d65b2997e00e46e3d97eb3709cf0d1c8e44dc1e1d9ab48135effa3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkV2L1DAUhoMo7uzqT1AK4qIX1Zw2bZMrkcUvWBD8uA5pcspkaZsxSWfdn-S_NJmpDnjj1TnJ--TN4byEPAH6Cii0r79SSqtStEBfUHhJaduwsrtHNsA7UQLn9X2y-YuckfMQbtIRgNUPyRlAU1cM-Ib8-qJm4yYb0BTazdG7cUxt9FaNRY_xFnEuQlS7fKut18s0oMc5Zn1atAuoo5vuimSTDfZZcnMSD_CofLHFyXm_ddasqJ0LZfZq1snyJIbi1sZtgT8j-vmPeaq7NJLaBXxEHgxqDPh4rRfk-_t3364-ltefP3y6entdagYilryCphoUA01N2_SVEB1SiqzF2qS2rzsq9EANaI6MGQ0IRqiecagbHAZVX5DLo2_6-MeCIcq0HY3jqGZ0S5AdQN3VAhL47B_wxi159CArzjrWiFQS1Rwp7V0IHge583ZS_k4ClTlJeUhS5pgkBXlIUnbp3dPVfeknNKdXa3QJeL4CKmg1Dj4t1IYTx2gLjGejN0cO09L2Fr0M2mJevvUpEGmc_c8ovwFuScAG</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2847459284</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Randomised controlled trial between stapled circumferential mucosectomy and conventional circular hemorrhoidectomy in advanced hemorrhoids with external mucosal prolapse</title><source>ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Boccasanta, Paolo ; Capretti, Pier Giuseppe ; Venturi, Marco ; Cioffi, Ugo ; De Simone, Matilde ; Salamina, Giovanni ; Contessini-Avesani, Ettore ; Peracchia, Alberto</creator><creatorcontrib>Boccasanta, Paolo ; Capretti, Pier Giuseppe ; Venturi, Marco ; Cioffi, Ugo ; De Simone, Matilde ; Salamina, Giovanni ; Contessini-Avesani, Ettore ; Peracchia, Alberto</creatorcontrib><description>Background: This randomized prospective study compared the outcome of circular hemorrhoidectomy according to the Hospital Leopold Bellan (HLB) technique (Paris) with Longo stapled circumferential mucosectomy (LSCM) in two homogeneous groups of patients affected by circular fourth-degree hemorrhoids with external mucosal prolapse.
Methods: From December 1996 to December 1999, 80 consecutive patients with fourth-degree hemorrhoids and external mucosal prolapse were randomly assigned to two groups. Forty patients (group A: 18 men, 22 women, mean age 50.5 years, range 21 to 82) underwent HLB hemorrhoidectomy, and 40 patients (group B: 15 men, 25 women, mean age 51.0 years, range 29 to 92) underwent LSCM. Before surgery, all patients were selected with a standard questionnaire for symptom evaluation, full proctological examination, flexible rectosigmoidoscopy, dynamic defecography, and anorectal manometry. No significant differences among the two groups were found. All patients were controlled with follow-up questionnaire and with clinical examination at 1, 2, 4, 12, and 54 weeks after the operation. A postoperative manometry was performed 3 months after surgery.
Results: The length of the operation was significantly lower in group B (25 ± 3.1 SD versus 50 ± 5.3 minutes,
P <0.001). Mean hospital stay was 3 ± 0.4 days in group A and 2 ± 0.5 days in group B (
P <0.01). Mean duration of inability to work was 8 ± 0.9 days in group B and 15 ± 1.4 days in group A (
P <0.001). Postoperative pain was significantly lower in group B (
P <0.001). Mean length of follow-up was 20 ± 8.0 months in group A and 20 ± 7.8 months in group B. Late complications were similar in the two groups, with 0%, at present, recurrence rate.
Conclusions: Our results confirm that both operations are safe, easy to perform, and effective in the treatment of advanced hemorrhoids with external mucosal prolapse. However, the LSCM seems to be preferable owing to the fewer postoperative complications, easier postoperative management, and shorter time to return to work. A longer follow-up is required to confirm the true efficacy of this surgical method.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0002-9610</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1879-1883</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/S0002-9610(01)00654-7</identifier><identifier>PMID: 11532418</identifier><identifier>CODEN: AJSUAB</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York, NY: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Adult ; Advanced hemorrhoidal disease ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Anorectal ; Biological and medical sciences ; Circular hemorrhoidectomy ; Complications ; Digestive System Surgical Procedures - methods ; Double-Blind Method ; Female ; Hemorrhoids ; Hemorrhoids - surgery ; Hospitals ; Humans ; Intestinal obstruction ; Local anesthesia ; Male ; Medical sciences ; Middle Aged ; Mucosa ; Pain ; Patients ; Postoperative ; Postoperative Care ; Postoperative Complications ; Prospective Studies ; Prospective study ; Questionnaires ; Rectal mucosal prolapse ; Rectal Prolapse - surgery ; Rectum ; Stapled hemorrhoidectomy ; Stomach, duodenum, intestine, rectum, anus ; Surgery ; Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases ; Surgery of the digestive system ; Sutures ; Ulcers</subject><ispartof>The American journal of surgery, 2001-07, Vol.182 (1), p.64-68</ispartof><rights>2001 Elsevier Science Inc.</rights><rights>2002 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>2001. Elsevier Science Inc.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c419t-82152fa41c0d65b2997e00e46e3d97eb3709cf0d1c8e44dc1e1d9ab48135effa3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c419t-82152fa41c0d65b2997e00e46e3d97eb3709cf0d1c8e44dc1e1d9ab48135effa3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27922,27923</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=14061487$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11532418$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Boccasanta, Paolo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Capretti, Pier Giuseppe</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Venturi, Marco</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cioffi, Ugo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>De Simone, Matilde</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Salamina, Giovanni</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Contessini-Avesani, Ettore</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Peracchia, Alberto</creatorcontrib><title>Randomised controlled trial between stapled circumferential mucosectomy and conventional circular hemorrhoidectomy in advanced hemorrhoids with external mucosal prolapse</title><title>The American journal of surgery</title><addtitle>Am J Surg</addtitle><description>Background: This randomized prospective study compared the outcome of circular hemorrhoidectomy according to the Hospital Leopold Bellan (HLB) technique (Paris) with Longo stapled circumferential mucosectomy (LSCM) in two homogeneous groups of patients affected by circular fourth-degree hemorrhoids with external mucosal prolapse.
Methods: From December 1996 to December 1999, 80 consecutive patients with fourth-degree hemorrhoids and external mucosal prolapse were randomly assigned to two groups. Forty patients (group A: 18 men, 22 women, mean age 50.5 years, range 21 to 82) underwent HLB hemorrhoidectomy, and 40 patients (group B: 15 men, 25 women, mean age 51.0 years, range 29 to 92) underwent LSCM. Before surgery, all patients were selected with a standard questionnaire for symptom evaluation, full proctological examination, flexible rectosigmoidoscopy, dynamic defecography, and anorectal manometry. No significant differences among the two groups were found. All patients were controlled with follow-up questionnaire and with clinical examination at 1, 2, 4, 12, and 54 weeks after the operation. A postoperative manometry was performed 3 months after surgery.
Results: The length of the operation was significantly lower in group B (25 ± 3.1 SD versus 50 ± 5.3 minutes,
P <0.001). Mean hospital stay was 3 ± 0.4 days in group A and 2 ± 0.5 days in group B (
P <0.01). Mean duration of inability to work was 8 ± 0.9 days in group B and 15 ± 1.4 days in group A (
P <0.001). Postoperative pain was significantly lower in group B (
P <0.001). Mean length of follow-up was 20 ± 8.0 months in group A and 20 ± 7.8 months in group B. Late complications were similar in the two groups, with 0%, at present, recurrence rate.
Conclusions: Our results confirm that both operations are safe, easy to perform, and effective in the treatment of advanced hemorrhoids with external mucosal prolapse. However, the LSCM seems to be preferable owing to the fewer postoperative complications, easier postoperative management, and shorter time to return to work. A longer follow-up is required to confirm the true efficacy of this surgical method.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Advanced hemorrhoidal disease</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Anorectal</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Circular hemorrhoidectomy</subject><subject>Complications</subject><subject>Digestive System Surgical Procedures - methods</subject><subject>Double-Blind Method</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Hemorrhoids</subject><subject>Hemorrhoids - surgery</subject><subject>Hospitals</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Intestinal obstruction</subject><subject>Local anesthesia</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Mucosa</subject><subject>Pain</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Postoperative</subject><subject>Postoperative Care</subject><subject>Postoperative Complications</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>Prospective study</subject><subject>Questionnaires</subject><subject>Rectal mucosal prolapse</subject><subject>Rectal Prolapse - surgery</subject><subject>Rectum</subject><subject>Stapled hemorrhoidectomy</subject><subject>Stomach, duodenum, intestine, rectum, anus</subject><subject>Surgery</subject><subject>Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases</subject><subject>Surgery of the digestive system</subject><subject>Sutures</subject><subject>Ulcers</subject><issn>0002-9610</issn><issn>1879-1883</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2001</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkV2L1DAUhoMo7uzqT1AK4qIX1Zw2bZMrkcUvWBD8uA5pcspkaZsxSWfdn-S_NJmpDnjj1TnJ--TN4byEPAH6Cii0r79SSqtStEBfUHhJaduwsrtHNsA7UQLn9X2y-YuckfMQbtIRgNUPyRlAU1cM-Ib8-qJm4yYb0BTazdG7cUxt9FaNRY_xFnEuQlS7fKut18s0oMc5Zn1atAuoo5vuimSTDfZZcnMSD_CofLHFyXm_ddasqJ0LZfZq1snyJIbi1sZtgT8j-vmPeaq7NJLaBXxEHgxqDPh4rRfk-_t3364-ltefP3y6entdagYilryCphoUA01N2_SVEB1SiqzF2qS2rzsq9EANaI6MGQ0IRqiecagbHAZVX5DLo2_6-MeCIcq0HY3jqGZ0S5AdQN3VAhL47B_wxi159CArzjrWiFQS1Rwp7V0IHge583ZS_k4ClTlJeUhS5pgkBXlIUnbp3dPVfeknNKdXa3QJeL4CKmg1Dj4t1IYTx2gLjGejN0cO09L2Fr0M2mJevvUpEGmc_c8ovwFuScAG</recordid><startdate>20010701</startdate><enddate>20010701</enddate><creator>Boccasanta, Paolo</creator><creator>Capretti, Pier Giuseppe</creator><creator>Venturi, Marco</creator><creator>Cioffi, Ugo</creator><creator>De Simone, Matilde</creator><creator>Salamina, Giovanni</creator><creator>Contessini-Avesani, Ettore</creator><creator>Peracchia, Alberto</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><general>Elsevier</general><general>Elsevier Limited</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20010701</creationdate><title>Randomised controlled trial between stapled circumferential mucosectomy and conventional circular hemorrhoidectomy in advanced hemorrhoids with external mucosal prolapse</title><author>Boccasanta, Paolo ; Capretti, Pier Giuseppe ; Venturi, Marco ; Cioffi, Ugo ; De Simone, Matilde ; Salamina, Giovanni ; Contessini-Avesani, Ettore ; Peracchia, Alberto</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c419t-82152fa41c0d65b2997e00e46e3d97eb3709cf0d1c8e44dc1e1d9ab48135effa3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2001</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Advanced hemorrhoidal disease</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Anorectal</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Circular hemorrhoidectomy</topic><topic>Complications</topic><topic>Digestive System Surgical Procedures - methods</topic><topic>Double-Blind Method</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Hemorrhoids</topic><topic>Hemorrhoids - surgery</topic><topic>Hospitals</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Intestinal obstruction</topic><topic>Local anesthesia</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Mucosa</topic><topic>Pain</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Postoperative</topic><topic>Postoperative Care</topic><topic>Postoperative Complications</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>Prospective study</topic><topic>Questionnaires</topic><topic>Rectal mucosal prolapse</topic><topic>Rectal Prolapse - surgery</topic><topic>Rectum</topic><topic>Stapled hemorrhoidectomy</topic><topic>Stomach, duodenum, intestine, rectum, anus</topic><topic>Surgery</topic><topic>Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases</topic><topic>Surgery of the digestive system</topic><topic>Sutures</topic><topic>Ulcers</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Boccasanta, Paolo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Capretti, Pier Giuseppe</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Venturi, Marco</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cioffi, Ugo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>De Simone, Matilde</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Salamina, Giovanni</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Contessini-Avesani, Ettore</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Peracchia, Alberto</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Health Medical collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Research Library</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>The American journal of surgery</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Boccasanta, Paolo</au><au>Capretti, Pier Giuseppe</au><au>Venturi, Marco</au><au>Cioffi, Ugo</au><au>De Simone, Matilde</au><au>Salamina, Giovanni</au><au>Contessini-Avesani, Ettore</au><au>Peracchia, Alberto</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Randomised controlled trial between stapled circumferential mucosectomy and conventional circular hemorrhoidectomy in advanced hemorrhoids with external mucosal prolapse</atitle><jtitle>The American journal of surgery</jtitle><addtitle>Am J Surg</addtitle><date>2001-07-01</date><risdate>2001</risdate><volume>182</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>64</spage><epage>68</epage><pages>64-68</pages><issn>0002-9610</issn><eissn>1879-1883</eissn><coden>AJSUAB</coden><abstract>Background: This randomized prospective study compared the outcome of circular hemorrhoidectomy according to the Hospital Leopold Bellan (HLB) technique (Paris) with Longo stapled circumferential mucosectomy (LSCM) in two homogeneous groups of patients affected by circular fourth-degree hemorrhoids with external mucosal prolapse.
Methods: From December 1996 to December 1999, 80 consecutive patients with fourth-degree hemorrhoids and external mucosal prolapse were randomly assigned to two groups. Forty patients (group A: 18 men, 22 women, mean age 50.5 years, range 21 to 82) underwent HLB hemorrhoidectomy, and 40 patients (group B: 15 men, 25 women, mean age 51.0 years, range 29 to 92) underwent LSCM. Before surgery, all patients were selected with a standard questionnaire for symptom evaluation, full proctological examination, flexible rectosigmoidoscopy, dynamic defecography, and anorectal manometry. No significant differences among the two groups were found. All patients were controlled with follow-up questionnaire and with clinical examination at 1, 2, 4, 12, and 54 weeks after the operation. A postoperative manometry was performed 3 months after surgery.
Results: The length of the operation was significantly lower in group B (25 ± 3.1 SD versus 50 ± 5.3 minutes,
P <0.001). Mean hospital stay was 3 ± 0.4 days in group A and 2 ± 0.5 days in group B (
P <0.01). Mean duration of inability to work was 8 ± 0.9 days in group B and 15 ± 1.4 days in group A (
P <0.001). Postoperative pain was significantly lower in group B (
P <0.001). Mean length of follow-up was 20 ± 8.0 months in group A and 20 ± 7.8 months in group B. Late complications were similar in the two groups, with 0%, at present, recurrence rate.
Conclusions: Our results confirm that both operations are safe, easy to perform, and effective in the treatment of advanced hemorrhoids with external mucosal prolapse. However, the LSCM seems to be preferable owing to the fewer postoperative complications, easier postoperative management, and shorter time to return to work. A longer follow-up is required to confirm the true efficacy of this surgical method.</abstract><cop>New York, NY</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>11532418</pmid><doi>10.1016/S0002-9610(01)00654-7</doi><tpages>5</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0002-9610 |
| ispartof | The American journal of surgery, 2001-07, Vol.182 (1), p.64-68 |
| issn | 0002-9610 1879-1883 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_71137391 |
| source | ScienceDirect Journals |
| subjects | Adult Advanced hemorrhoidal disease Aged Aged, 80 and over Anorectal Biological and medical sciences Circular hemorrhoidectomy Complications Digestive System Surgical Procedures - methods Double-Blind Method Female Hemorrhoids Hemorrhoids - surgery Hospitals Humans Intestinal obstruction Local anesthesia Male Medical sciences Middle Aged Mucosa Pain Patients Postoperative Postoperative Care Postoperative Complications Prospective Studies Prospective study Questionnaires Rectal mucosal prolapse Rectal Prolapse - surgery Rectum Stapled hemorrhoidectomy Stomach, duodenum, intestine, rectum, anus Surgery Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases Surgery of the digestive system Sutures Ulcers |
| title | Randomised controlled trial between stapled circumferential mucosectomy and conventional circular hemorrhoidectomy in advanced hemorrhoids with external mucosal prolapse |
| url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-09T14%3A15%3A32IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Randomised%20controlled%20trial%20between%20stapled%20circumferential%20mucosectomy%20and%20conventional%20circular%20hemorrhoidectomy%20in%20advanced%20hemorrhoids%20with%20external%20mucosal%20prolapse&rft.jtitle=The%20American%20journal%20of%20surgery&rft.au=Boccasanta,%20Paolo&rft.date=2001-07-01&rft.volume=182&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=64&rft.epage=68&rft.pages=64-68&rft.issn=0002-9610&rft.eissn=1879-1883&rft.coden=AJSUAB&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/S0002-9610(01)00654-7&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E71137391%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c419t-82152fa41c0d65b2997e00e46e3d97eb3709cf0d1c8e44dc1e1d9ab48135effa3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2847459284&rft_id=info:pmid/11532418&rfr_iscdi=true |