Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23098097›Full record

Trial reportBMC gastroenterology2012

The HubBLe trial: haemorrhoidal artery ligation (HAL) versus rubber band ligation (RBL) for haemorrhoids.

Jim Tiernan, Daniel Hind, Angus Watson, Allan J Wailoo, Michael Bradburn, Neil Shephard, Katie Biggs, Steven Brown

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC gastroenterology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Sonographic appearance of anal cushions of hemorrhoids.World journal of gastroenterology · 2017
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Approach to hemorrhoids.Current gastroenterology reports · 2013
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Jim TiernanCRUK Clinical Research Fellow, St James' University Hospital, Leeds, UK.
Daniel Hind
Angus Watson
Allan J Wailoo
Michael Bradburn
Neil Shephard
Katie Biggs
Steven Brown
University of Sheffield · GBNorthern General Hospital · GBRaigmore Hospital · GBSt James's University Hospital · GB

Funding

Department of Health 10/57/46
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHaemorrhoids (piles) are a very common condition seen in surgical clinics. After exclusion of more sinister causes of haemorrhoidal symptoms (rectal bleeding, perianal irritation and prolapse), the best option for treatment depends upon persistence and severity of the symptoms. Minor symptoms often respond to conservative treatment such as dietary fibre and reassurance. For more severe symptoms treatment such as rubber band ligation may be therapeutic and is a very commonly performed procedure in the surgical outpatient setting. Surgery is usually reserved for those who have more severe symptoms, as well as those who do not respond to non-operative therapy; surgical techniques include haemorrhoidectomy and haemorrhoidopexy. More recently, haemorrhoidal artery ligation has been introduced as a minimally invasive, non destructive surgical option.There are substantial data in the literature concerning efficacy and safety of 'rubber band ligation including multiple comparisons with other interventions, though there are no studies comparing it to haemorrhoidal artery ligation. A recent overview has been carried out by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence which concludes that current evidence shows haemorrhoidal artery ligation to be a safe alternative to haemorrhoidectomy and haemorrhoidopexy though it also highlights the lack of good quality data as evidence for the advantages of the technique. METHODS/

designThe aim of this study is to establish the clinical effectiveness and cost effectiveness of haemorrhoidal artery ligation compared with conventional rubber band ligation in the treatment of people with symptomatic second or third degree (Grade II or Grade III) haemorrhoids.

designA multi-centre, parallel group randomised controlled trial. OUTCOMES: The primary outcome is patient-reported symptom recurrence twelve months following the intervention. Secondary outcome measures relate to symptoms, complications, health resource use, health related quality of life and cost effectiveness following the intervention.

participants350 patients with grade II or grade III haemorrhoids will be recruited in surgical departments in up to 14 NHS hospitals. RANDOMISATION: A multi-centre, parallel group randomised controlled trial. Block randomisation by centre will be used, with 175 participants randomised to each group. DISCUSSION: The results of the research will help inform future practice for the treatment of grade II and III haemorrhoids.

trial registrationISRCTN41394716.

Indexed as

Clinical ProtocolsFemaleHemorrhoidsHumansLigationMaleRecurrenceRubberSeverity of Illness IndexTreatment OutcomeRubber

Identifiers

PMID23098097
PMCPMC3503770
OpenAlexW1992977553

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.