Comparing the efficacy and safety of different analgesic strategies after open hemorrhoidectomy: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of different analgesic interventions in the treatment of pain after open hemorrhoidectomy by systematic review and network meta-analysis. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials that met the inclusion criteria in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, CNKI, WANFANG DATA, and VIP were searched from the date of database construction to June 28, 2022. RESULTS: Among the 13 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 731 patients were included in the network meta-analysis. Most interventions are more effective than placebo in relieving postoperative pain. 24 h postoperative Visual Analogue Scale (VAS): glyceryl trinitrate (GTN) (mean difference (MD) - 4.20, 95% CI - 5.35, - 3.05), diltiazem (MD - 1.97, 95% CI - 2.44, - 1.51), botulinum toxin (BT) (MD - 1.50, 95% CI - 2.25, - 0.75), sucralfate (MD - 1.01, 95% CI - 1.53, - 0.49), and electroacupuncture (EA) (MD - 0.45, 95% CI - 0.87, - 0.04). 48 h postoperative VAS: diltiazem (MD - 2.45, 95% CI - 2.74, - 2.15), BT (MD - 2.18, 95% CI - 2.52, - 1.84), and sucralfate (MD - 1.41, 95% CI - 1.85, - 0.97). 7 d postoperative VAS: diltiazem (MD - 2.49, 95% CI - 3.20, - 1.78) and sucralfate (MD - 1.42, 95% CI - 2.00, - 0.85). The first postoperative defecation VAS: EA (MD - 0.70, 95% CI - 0.95, - 0.46). There are few data on intervention safety, and additional high-quality RCTs are expected to study this topic in the future. CONCLUSION: Diltiazem ointment may be the most effective medication for pain relief following open hemorrhoidectomy, and it can dramatically reduce pain within one week of surgery. The second and third recommended medications are BT and sucralfate ointment. GTN has a significant advantage in alleviating pain 24 h after open hemorrhoidectomy, but whether it causes headache is debatable; thus, it should be used with caution. EA's analgesic efficacy is still unknown. There was limited evidence on the safety of the intervention in this study, and it was simply presented statistically.

Local anesthesia versus saddle block for open hemorrhoidectomy: cost-analysis from a randomized, double blind controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite the benefits attributed to the use of local anesthesia (LA) for open hemorrhoidectomy (OH) in developed countries, this technique is still not considered as the first line technique in low-income countries such as Uganda; therefore, we aimed at comparing the cost of OH under LA versus Saddle block among patients with 3rd or 4th degree hemorrhoids. METHODS: This trial was conducted from December 2021 to May 2022 among patients with primary uncomplicated 3rd or 4th degree hemorrhoids. The operating time, and direct costs in (US$) including medical and non-medical were recorded. We analysed the cost in the two groups (local anesthesia versus saddle block) using SPSS version 23.0. RESULTS: Findings of fifty-eight patients were analysed including 29 participants per group. There was a significant difference in operating time and cost among the two groups (p < 0.05). The mean operating time was 15.52 ± 5.34(SD) minutes versus 33.72 ± 11.54 min for OH under LA and SB respectively. The mean cost of OH under LA was 57.42 ± 8.90 US$ compared to 63.38 ± 12.77US$ in SB group. CONCLUSION: The use of local anesthesia for OH was found to have less operating time with high-cost effectiveness. Being affordable, local anesthesia can help to increase the turnover of patients who would otherwise wait for the availability of anesthesia provider. Policy makers should emphasize its applicability in low-income settings to help in the achievement of 2030 global surgery goals. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Pan African Clinical Trials Registry, PACTR202110667430356. Registered on 08/10/2021.

Pain assessment following open hemorrhoidectomy under local anesthesia versus saddle block: a multicenter randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: There is disparity in evidence on pain assessment post open hemorrhoidectomy (OH) using local anesthesia and its use in developing countries compared to developed countries. Therefore, we conducted this study to assess the occurrence of postoperative pain following open hemorrhoidectomy under local anesthesia versus saddle block for uncomplicated 3rd or 4th degree hemorrhoids. METHODS: This was a prospective equivalence randomized, double blind controlled trial conducted from December 2021 to May 2022 among patients with primary uncomplicated 3rd or 4th degree hemorrhoids. Pain severity was assessed at 2, 4 and 6 h post open hemorrhoidectomy using visual analogue scale (VAS). Data was analysed using SPSS version 26 at a p < 0.05 as statically significant using visual analogue scale (VAS). RESULTS: We recruited 58 participants in this study who underwent open hemorrhoidectomy under local anesthesia or saddle block (29 participants per group). The sex ratio was of 1.15 of female to male and a mean age of 39 ± 13. VAS was found to be different at 2 h post OH compare to other time of pain assessment but not statically significant by area under the cover (AUC) (95% CI = 486-0.773: AUC = 0.63; p = 0.09) with a none significance by Kruskal-Wallis's test (p:0.925). CONCLUSION: Local anesthesia was found to be having a similar pain severity occurrence in post operative period among patients undergoing open hemorrhoidectomy for primary uncomplicated 3rd or 4th degree hemorrhoids. Close monitoring of pain in postoperative period is mandatory especially at 2 h to assess need of analgesia. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Pan African Clinical Trials Registry, PACTR202110667430356. Registered on 8th October, 2021.

Open Hemorrhoidectomy With Ligasure™ Under Local or Spinal Anesthesia: A Comparative Study.

BACKGROUND: There is increasing evidence that many anorectal surgical procedures may be performed under local anesthesia. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of local anesthesia in the outpatient clinic vs spinal anesthesia in the operating room for open hemorrhoidectomy. METHODS: Sixty-two patients with grade III or IV hemorrhoids underwent open hemorrhoidectomy with LigaSure™ between 2018 and 2020. Of them, 32 procedures were performed in the operating room under spinal anesthesia with hyperbaric bupivacaine and other 30 procedures were undertaken in the outpatient clinic under local anesthesia with ropivacaine. RESULTS: There were no significant differences regarding age, gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, and Goligher's grade in between groups. No significant differences were observed in postoperative pain score (P = .85), perioperative complications (P = .51), and reoperation rate (P = .96). No recurrences and no differences in patients' satisfaction degree (P = .76) were documented at long-term follow-up in both study groups. DISCUSSION: Our results suggest that open hemorrhoidectomy with LigaSure™ performed in selected patients under local anesthesia in the outpatient clinic is a well-tolerated, safe, and effective procedure.

Open hemorrhoidectomy under local anesthesia versus saddle block in western Uganda: a study protocol for a prospective equivalence randomized, double-blind controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: While open hemorrhoidectomy under local anesthesia has been shown to be more cost-effective with shorter operation times and lower complication rates, local anesthesia is still not considered as a first-line technique in low-income countries like Uganda. The objective of this trial is to compare open hemorrhoidectomy using local anesthesia versus saddle block among patients with primary uncomplicated 3rd- or 4th-degree hemorrhoids in western Uganda. METHODS: The protocol for a prospective equivalence randomized, double-blind controlled trial was conducted among patients with primary uncomplicated 3rd- or 4th-degree hemorrhoids. Recruitment was started in December 2021 and is expected to end in May 2022. Consenting participants who require open hemorrhoidectomy indicated at Kampala International Teaching Hospital, Uganda, will be randomized into two groups of 29 patients per arm. DISCUSSION: The primary outcome of this study is to compare the occurrences of postoperative pain following open hemorrhoidectomy using the visual analog scale in an interval of 2, 4, and 6 h and 7 days postoperatively. Furthermore, the mean operative time from the induction of anesthesia to the end of the surgical procedure as well as the cost-effectiveness of the 2 techniques will be assessed in both groups. Open hemorrhoidectomy under local anesthesia has the potential to offer benefits to patients but most importantly expediting return to baseline and functional status, shorter hospital stay by meeting the faster discharge criteria, and reduction in costs associated with reduced length of stay and complications. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Pan African Clinical Trials Registry PACTR202110667430356. Registered on 8 October 2021.

Open Hemorrhoidectomy

The open hemorrhoidectomy has been recognized as the treatment of choice for symptomatic prolapsing hemorrhoids. Although the open hemorrhoidectomy is thought to be associated with more postoperative pain and delayed wound healing compared with other conventional procedures such as a closed hemorrhoidectomy, and a semi- closed or submucosal hemorrhoidectomy, it is still unclear which procedure is preferable in terms of postoperative pain, wound healing, hospital stay, and time off work. To address this issue, several studies have been performed. According to randomized controlled studies comparing an open hemorrhoidectomy to a closed hemorrhoidectomy, there are no significant differences in the severity of pain and the hospital stay between the two procedures; however, the healing time in the closed hemorrhoidectomy is faster and the operation time in the open hemorrhoidectomy is shorter. Since there are few randomized controlled studies comparing an open hemorrhoidectomy with a semi-closed hemorrhoidectomy or submucosal hemorrhoidectomy, it is difficult to conclude which procedure is superior to the others. Yet, there seems to be no significant difference between these procedures. In 1998, a novel procedure, a stapled hemorrhoidopexy, was introduced by Longo. Several randomized controlled studies comparing the open hemorrhoidectomy with the stapled hemorrhoidopexy showed that the latter was associated with less pain, shorter hospital stay, and earlier return to work. However, considering the lack of long- term data and the disastrous complications, such as retroperitoneal sepsis and rectal perforation, there is still controversy about its efficacy and safety as a definitive treatment of hemorrhoids. The open hemorrhoidectomy is time-tested and is comparable to other conventional techniques in terms of postoperative pain, hospital stay, and time off work. Further study should be performed to assess the long-term results of a stapled hemorrhoidopexy.