[New paradigm for haemorrhoidal disease treatment]. / Changement de paradigme dans la prise en charge de la pathologie hémorroïdaire.

NEW PARADIGM FOR HAEMORRHOIDAL DISEASE TREATMENT. The modern surgical management of hemorrhoidal disease was born in 1937, without any great variation until the 90s. Later then, the quest for a surgery without pain or secondary complications has stimulated the appearance of new techniques, often dependent on sophisticated technologies, the most recent being still under evaluation. At the same time, conventional excision surgery has evolved to become less aggressive. Overall, the requirement for less morbidity has become a priority, exceeding that of the long-term efficacy, and the cost of those interventions based on sophisticated technologies has significantly increased.

CHANGEMENT DE PARADIGME DANS LA PRISE. EN CHARGE DE LA PATHOLOGIE HÉMORROÏDAIRELa prise en charge chirurgicale moderne de la maladie hémorroïdaire est née en 1937, sans grande variation jusque dans les années 1990. À partir de cette période, l'exigence d'une chirurgie moins douloureuse et sans séquelles a stimulé l'apparition de nouvelles techniques reposant le plus souvent sur des technologies sophistiquées, les plus récentes étant encore en cours d'évaluation. Parallèlement, la chirurgie d'exérèse classique a évolué pour devenir moins agressive. Au total, l'exigence de moindre morbidité est devenue prioritaire, l'efficacité à long terme secondaire, et l'arrivée des nouvelles technologies a augmenté le c oût direct de ces interventions.

Outcomes of stapled transanal rectal resection vs. biofeedback for the treatment of outlet obstruction associated with rectal intussusception and rectocele: a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial.

PURPOSE: This study was designed to assess the safety and outcomes achieved with stapled transanal rectal resection vs. biofeedback training in obstructed defecation patients. METHODS: A total of 119 women patients who suffered from obstructed defecation with associated rectocele and rectal intussusception were randomized to stapled transanal rectal resection or biofeedback training. Stapled transanal rectal resection was performed by using two circular staplers to produce transanal full-thickness rectal resection. Primary outcome was symptoms of obstructed defecation resolution at 12 months; secondary outcomes included safety, change in quality of life score, and anatomic correction of rectocele and rectal intussusception. RESULTS: Fourteen percent (8/59) stapled transanal rectal resection and 50 percent (30/60) biofeedback training patients withdrew early. Eight (15 percent) patients treated with stapled transanal rectal resection and 1 (2 percent) biofeedback patient experienced adverse events. One serious adverse event (bleeding) occurred after stapled transanal rectal resection. Scores of obstructed defecation improved significantly in both groups as did quality of life (both P < 0.0001). Successful treatment was observed in 44 (81.5 percent) stapled transanal rectal resection vs. 13 (33.3 percent) evaluable biofeedback training patients (P < 0.0001). Functional benefit was observed early and remained stable during the study. CONCLUSIONS: In this controlled trial, stapled transanal rectal resection was well tolerated, was more effective than biofeedback training for the resolution of obstructed defecation symptoms, and improved quality of life, with minimal risk of impaired continence. Thus, stapled transanal rectal resection offers a new treatment alternative for obstructed defecation after failure of conservative measures including biofeedback training, a noninvasive approach.