Cargando…
Rubber band ligation versus haemorrhoidectomy for the treatment of grade II–III haemorrhoids: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to review clinical outcome of haemorrhoidectomy and rubber band ligation in grade II–III haemorrhoids. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted. Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, Clinicaltrials.gov, and the WHO International Trial Registry Platform were searc...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer International Publishing
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8124052/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33683503 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10151-021-02430-x |
_version_ | 1783693095320158208 |
---|---|
author | Dekker, L. Han-Geurts, I. J. M. Rørvik, H. D. van Dieren, S. Bemelman, W. A. |
author_facet | Dekker, L. Han-Geurts, I. J. M. Rørvik, H. D. van Dieren, S. Bemelman, W. A. |
author_sort | Dekker, L. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to review clinical outcome of haemorrhoidectomy and rubber band ligation in grade II–III haemorrhoids. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted. Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, Clinicaltrials.gov, and the WHO International Trial Registry Platform were searched, from inception until May 2018, to identify randomised clinical trials comparing rubber band ligation with haemorrhoidectomy for grade II–III haemorrhoids. The primary outcome was control of symptoms. Secondary outcomes included postoperative pain, postoperative complications, anal continence, patient satisfaction, quality of life and healthcare costs were assessed. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. RESULTS: Three hundred and twenty-four studies were identified. Eight trials met the inclusion criteria. All trials were of moderate methodological quality. Outcome measures were diverse and not clearly defined. Control of symptoms was better following haemorrhoidectomy. Patients had less pain after rubber band ligation. There were more complications (bleeding, urinary retention, anal incontinence/stenosis) in the haemorrhoidectomy group. Patient satisfaction was equal in both groups. There were no data on quality of life and healthcare costs except that in one study patients resumed work more early after rubber band ligation. CONCLUSIONS: Haemorrhoidectomy seems to provide better symptom control but at the cost of more pain and complications. However, due to the poor quality of the studies analysed/it is not possible to determine which of the two procedures provides the best treatment for grade II–III haemorrhoids. Further studies focusing on clearly defined outcome measurements taking patients perspective and economic impact into consideration are required. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8124052 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Springer International Publishing |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-81240522021-05-26 Rubber band ligation versus haemorrhoidectomy for the treatment of grade II–III haemorrhoids: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials Dekker, L. Han-Geurts, I. J. M. Rørvik, H. D. van Dieren, S. Bemelman, W. A. Tech Coloproctol Review BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to review clinical outcome of haemorrhoidectomy and rubber band ligation in grade II–III haemorrhoids. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted. Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, Clinicaltrials.gov, and the WHO International Trial Registry Platform were searched, from inception until May 2018, to identify randomised clinical trials comparing rubber band ligation with haemorrhoidectomy for grade II–III haemorrhoids. The primary outcome was control of symptoms. Secondary outcomes included postoperative pain, postoperative complications, anal continence, patient satisfaction, quality of life and healthcare costs were assessed. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. RESULTS: Three hundred and twenty-four studies were identified. Eight trials met the inclusion criteria. All trials were of moderate methodological quality. Outcome measures were diverse and not clearly defined. Control of symptoms was better following haemorrhoidectomy. Patients had less pain after rubber band ligation. There were more complications (bleeding, urinary retention, anal incontinence/stenosis) in the haemorrhoidectomy group. Patient satisfaction was equal in both groups. There were no data on quality of life and healthcare costs except that in one study patients resumed work more early after rubber band ligation. CONCLUSIONS: Haemorrhoidectomy seems to provide better symptom control but at the cost of more pain and complications. However, due to the poor quality of the studies analysed/it is not possible to determine which of the two procedures provides the best treatment for grade II–III haemorrhoids. Further studies focusing on clearly defined outcome measurements taking patients perspective and economic impact into consideration are required. Springer International Publishing 2021-03-08 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC8124052/ /pubmed/33683503 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10151-021-02430-x Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Review Dekker, L. Han-Geurts, I. J. M. Rørvik, H. D. van Dieren, S. Bemelman, W. A. Rubber band ligation versus haemorrhoidectomy for the treatment of grade II–III haemorrhoids: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials |
title | Rubber band ligation versus haemorrhoidectomy for the treatment of grade II–III haemorrhoids: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials |
title_full | Rubber band ligation versus haemorrhoidectomy for the treatment of grade II–III haemorrhoids: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials |
title_fullStr | Rubber band ligation versus haemorrhoidectomy for the treatment of grade II–III haemorrhoids: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials |
title_full_unstemmed | Rubber band ligation versus haemorrhoidectomy for the treatment of grade II–III haemorrhoids: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials |
title_short | Rubber band ligation versus haemorrhoidectomy for the treatment of grade II–III haemorrhoids: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials |
title_sort | rubber band ligation versus haemorrhoidectomy for the treatment of grade ii–iii haemorrhoids: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8124052/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33683503 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10151-021-02430-x |
work_keys_str_mv | AT dekkerl rubberbandligationversushaemorrhoidectomyforthetreatmentofgradeiiiiihaemorrhoidsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials AT hangeurtsijm rubberbandligationversushaemorrhoidectomyforthetreatmentofgradeiiiiihaemorrhoidsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials AT rørvikhd rubberbandligationversushaemorrhoidectomyforthetreatmentofgradeiiiiihaemorrhoidsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials AT vandierens rubberbandligationversushaemorrhoidectomyforthetreatmentofgradeiiiiihaemorrhoidsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials AT bemelmanwa rubberbandligationversushaemorrhoidectomyforthetreatmentofgradeiiiiihaemorrhoidsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials |