Trial reportChirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany)2024
Comparison between stapled hemorrhoidopexy and harmonic scalpel hemorrhoidectomy in the management of third- and fourth-degree piles: a randomized clinical trial.
Trial report in Chirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Long-term outcomes of stapled haemorrhoidopexy versus conventional haemorrhoidectomy: An updated systematic review, meta-analysis and trial-sequential analysis of randomized controlled trials.International journal of colorectal disease · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study compared the results of stapled hemorrhoidopexy (SH) and harmonic scalpel hemorrhoidectomy (HSH) in the management of grade III and grade IV piles regarding the time of the procedure, postoperative pain, patient satisfaction, wound infection, bleeding, incontinence, and recurrence within 1 year. PATIENTS AND
methodsThis was a single-blind, prospective, randomized, controlled, single-center trial conducted from January to December 2022 that included 50 (68.75%) male and 20 (31.25%) female patients with third- and fourth-degree piles.
resultsThe patients were divided into two groups of 35 patients each. Group I underwent SH and group II underwent HSH. The mean age of group I was 42.94 years and of group II, 42.20 years. The mean time of the procedure was 24.42 min ± 2.367 for SH and 31.48 min ± 2.21 for HSH. Postoperative pain in group I was lower than in group II during the first 2 weeks, but there was persistent mild pain in most patients in group I at the 2‑week follow-up. In group II there was significant improvement in pain after 2 weeks, with higher patient satisfaction. Wound infection was detected in 3 (5%) patients in group I and no patients in group II (p = 0.077). Postoperative bleeding occurred in 4 (11.4%) patients in group I in the form of spotting after defecation only during the first postoperative month; no bleeding was detected in group II (p = 0.039). There were 3 (15%) cases of flatus incontinence but after taking a detailed history these were found to be cases of urgency to defecate rather than incontinence. There were 7 (20%) cases of recurrence at the 1‑year follow-up in group I and 1 (2.9%) case in group II (p = 0.024).
conclusionCompared with SH, HSH was safer, easier, and associated with a lower incidence of recurrence after 1 year and with higher patient satisfaction.
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.