SynthesisBJS open2021
Interventional treatments for prolapsing haemorrhoids: network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BJS open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Can Targeting Sphincter Spasm Reduce Post-Haemorrhoidectomy Pain? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.World journal of surgery · 2023Pooled it
- Radiofrequency Ablation for Hemorrhoidal Disease.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Curcumin attenuates the progression of hemorrhoids through the inhibition of angiogenesis via miR-190a-5p/TGFBR2.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Evaluating Turkish society's approaches to hemorrhoid treatment using text mining and sentiment analysis methods.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- High-intensity focused ultrasound rectoanal lifting (HIFU-RAL) for prolapsed hemorrhoids: a case series.Journal of surgical case reports · 2025Article
- SHAPE-skin-sparing hemorrhoidectomy and PExy: a novel technique for the surgical treatment of hemorrhoidal disease.Updates in surgery · 2025Article
- The Complications of Hemorrhoidectomy From Patients' Perspective: A Qualitative Study.Health science reports · 2025Article
- Postoperative Perianal Abscess and Concomitant Anorectal Fistula: An Extremely Rare Complication After Emergency Transanal Hemorrhoidal Dearterialization With Mucopexy for Hemorrhoidal Disease.Case reports in surgery · 2025Article
- Efficacy and Safety of a New Technique Combining Injection Sclerotherapy and External Hemorrhoidectomy for Prolapsed Hemorrhoids: A Single-center Observational Study.Journal of the anus, rectum and colon · 2024Article
- Evaluation of the current guidelines for the management of haemorrhoidal disease using the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation II instrument.Annals of translational medicine · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMultiple treatments for early-moderate grade symptomatic haemorrhoids currently exist, each associated with their respective efficacy, complications, and risks. The aim of this study was to compare the relative clinical outcomes and effectiveness of interventional treatments for grade II-III haemorrhoids.
methodsA systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA criteria for all the RCTs published between 1980 and 2020; manuscripts were identified using the MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL databases. Inclusion criteria were RCTs comparing procedural interventions for grade II-III haemorrhoids. Primary outcomes of interest were: symptom recurrence at a minimum follow-up of 6 weeks, postprocedural pain measured on a visual analogue scale (VAS) on day 1, and postprocedural complications (bleeding, urinary retention, and bowel incontinence). After bias assessment and heterogeneity analysis, a Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed.
resultsSeventy-nine RCTs were identified, including 9232 patients. Fourteen different treatments were analysed in the network meta-analysis. Overall, there were 59 RCTs (73 per cent) judged as being at high risk of bias, and the greatest risk was in the domain measurement of outcome. Variable amounts of heterogeneity were detected in direct treatment comparisons, in particular for symptom recurrence and postprocedural pain. Recurrence of haemorrhoidal symptoms was reported by 54 studies, involving 7026 patients and 14 treatments. Closed haemorrhoidectomy had the lowest recurrence risk, followed by open haemorrhoidectomy, suture ligation with mucopexy, stapled haemorrhoidopexy, and Doppler-guided haemorrhoid artery ligation (DG-HAL) with mucopexy. Pain was reported in 34 studies involving 3812 patients and 11 treatments. Direct current electrotherapy, DG-HAL with mucopexy, and infrared coagulation yielded the lowest pain scores. Postprocedural bleeding was recorded in 46 studies involving 5696 patients and 14 treatments. Open haemorrhoidectomy had the greatest risk of postprocedural bleeding, followed by stapled haemorrhoidopexy and closed haemorrhoidectomy. Urinary retention was reported in 30 studies comparing 10 treatments involving 3116 participants. Open haemorrhoidectomy and stapled haemorrhoidopexy had significantly higher odds of urinary retention than rubber band ligation and DG-HAL with mucopexy. Nine studies reported bowel incontinence comparing five treatments involving 1269 participants. Open haemorrhoidectomy and stapled haemorrhoidopexy had the highest probability of bowel incontinence.
conclusionOpen and closed haemorrhoidectomy, and stapled haemorrhoidopexy were associated with worse pain, and more postprocedural bleeding, urinary retention, and bowel incontinence, but had the lowest rates of symptom recurrence. The risks and benefits of each treatment should be discussed with patients before a decision is made.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.