Short-term Outcomes of Transanal Hemorrhoidal Dearterialization With Mucopexy Versus Vessel-Sealing Device Hemorrhoidectomy for Grade III to IV Hemorrhoids: A Prospective Randomized Multicenter Trial.

BACKGROUND: Transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization with mucopexy and vessel-sealing device hemorrhoidectomy seem to reduce postoperative pain compared with classic excisional hemorrhoidectomy, but whether one of them is superior remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: We compared transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization with mucopexy and vessel-sealing device hemorrhoidectomy. DESIGN: This was a multicenter, randomized controlled trial. SETTING: The study was conducted at 6 Spanish centers. PATIENTS: Patients aged ≥18 years with grade III to IV hemorrhoids were included. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization with mucopexy (n = 39) or vessel-sealing device hemorrhoidectomy (n = 41). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was the mean postoperative number of days in which patients needed nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Secondary outcomes were postoperative pain, 30-day morbidity, patient satisfaction, Vaizey score, hemorrhoid symptoms score, return to work, and quality of life. RESULTS: More patients were still taking analgesia in the vessel-sealing device hemorrhoidectomy group during the second postoperative week compared with the transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization with mucopexy group (87.8% vs 53.8%; p = 0.002). For the transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization with mucopexy group, analgesia consumption continued until day 10.1 (mean; SD = 7.22 d), whereas in the vessel-sealing device hemorrhoidectomy group it continued until day 15.2 (mean; SD = 8.70 d; p = 0.006). The mean daily average pain was similar during the first (p = 0.900) and second postoperative weeks (p = 0.265). Mean operative time was higher for the transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization with mucopexy group versus the vessel-sealing device hemorrhoidectomy group (45 min; range, 40-60 vs 20 min; range, 15-41 min; p < 0.001). Postoperative complications rate, use of laxatives, patient satisfaction, Vaizey score, hemorrhoids symptoms score, return to work, and quality of life at 1 month after surgery were similar between groups. LIMITATIONS: The main limitation of this study was that the 2 groups did not contain equal numbers of grade III and IV hemorrhoids. CONCLUSIONS: Transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization with mucopexy is associated with a shorter need for postoperative analgesia compared with vessel-sealing device hemorrhoidectomy. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A915. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02654249.

Predictors of wound infection in elective colorectal surgery. Multicenter observational case-control study.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study is to evaluate the usefulness of Vicryl Plus(®) suture in reducing the rate of postoperative wound infection in elective colorectal surgery. METHODS: A prospective case-control multicenter study with 480 patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery was performed between 2006 and 2007. Patients were divided in 2 groups of equal sample size: group 1, closure of the abdominal wall using Vicryl Plus(®) and group 2 where PDS II(®) was used. The study involved 5 hospitals in the Spanish State. Wound infection was classified into superficial and deep. All patients diagnosed of wound infection during the hospital stay and up to 30 days after discharge were studied. For the statistical analysis Chi-square test and Fisher exact were used for bivariate analysis and logistic regression model for multivariate analysis. RESULTS: Wound infection rates were significantly lower in group 1: 14.6 vs. 29.2. Multivariate analysis showed that risk of wound infection was higher in patients with cancer, lung disease, anemia, operative time greater than 2 h, lack of second dose intra-operative prophylactic antibiotic and laparotomy closure with PDS suture II(®). CONCLUSIONS: The use of suture coated with triclosan can be an effective prophylactic tool in reducing wound infection rate in patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery.

[Current status of elective surgical treatment of ulcerative colitis. A systematic review]. / Estado actual del tratamiento quirúrgico electivo de la colitis ulcerosa. Revisión sistemática.

Despite recent advances in the medical treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC), approximately 25-40% of patients will need surgery during their disease. The aim of elective surgical treatment of UC is to remove the colon/and rectum with minimal postoperative morbidity, and to offer a good long-term quality of life. There are several technical options for the surgical treatment of UC; at present, the most frequently offered is restorative proctocolectomy and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. Both the surgeon and patient should be aware of the risks associated with a technically demanding procedure and possible postoperative complications, including the possibility of infertility, permanent stoma, or several surgical procedures for pouch-related complications. A precise knowledge of each surgical technique, and its indications, complications, long-term risks and benefits is useful to offer the best surgical option tailored to each patient. We searched in PubMed, MEDLINE, and EMBASE for all kinds of articles (all the publications until April 2012). Papers on Crohn's disease, indeterminate colitis, or other forms of colitis were excluded from the review. We reviewed the abstracts and identified potentially relevant articles. MeSH words were used as search, "ulcerative colitis", "surgery", "indications", "elective surgery", "colectomy," "proctocolectomy," "laparoscopy", "Complications," "outcome", "results" "quality of life". One hundred and four articles were included in this review.