ArticleFrontiers in surgery2024
General anesthesia with local infiltration reduces urine retention rate and prolongs analgesic effect than spinal anesthesia for hemorrhoidectomy.
Article in Frontiers in surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Intravenous sedation combined with local anesthesia versus spinal anesthesia for hemorrhoidectomy with rubber band ligation: A retrospective cohort study.International journal of colorectal disease · 2026Article
- Determinants influencing decision-making for operative and perioperative management of grade III and IV hemorrhoidal disease: secondary analysis of a multicenter nationwide prospective cohort study.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2026Article
- Laser Hemorrhoidoplasty: Postoperative Outcomes and Predictive Factors for Pain, Bleeding, and Recovery.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Observational
- EDFrontiers in medicine · 2025Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Postoperative pain and complications pose significant challenges following a hemorrhoidectomy. Attaining effective anesthesia with minimal complications is crucial. The ideal anesthesia method for ambulatory hemorrhoidectomy remains uncertain. This study aimed to investigate whether the combination of general anesthesia plus local infiltration (GAL) is associated with lower complications and reduced pain compared to spinal anesthesia (SA) in the context of hemorrhoidectomy. Methods: This retrospective single-center cohort study, conducted in a tertiary medical center in East Asia, evaluated excisional hemorrhoidectomies performed between January 1, 2017, and March 31, 2023, utilizing GAL or SA. Data on the six most common complications-pain, constipation, acute urine retention (AUR), bleeding, nausea, and headache-were extracted from medical records. A total of 550 hemorrhoidectomies were included: 220 in the GAL group and 330 in the SA group. Patient characteristics were comparable between the two groups. Results: The AUR rate was significantly lower in the GAL group compared to the SA group (15.5% vs. 32.1%, Discussion: GAL emerges as a favorable choice for anesthesia in hemorrhoidectomy, demonstrating a lower incidence of urine retention and a prolonged analgesic effect in multiple hemorrhoidectomies. These findings support the conclusion that GAL represents an optimal anesthetic method for enhancing the postoperative experience in patients undergoing hemorrhoidectomy.
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.