ArticleAmerican journal of translational research2026
Clinical efficacy and recurrence analysis of endoscopic rubber band ligation combined with external hemorrhoidectomy for mixed hemorrhoids.
Article in American journal of translational research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
- Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of endoscopic rubber band ligation combined with external hemorrhoidectomy (ERBL+EH) for mixed hemorrhoids compared with Milligan-Morgan hemorrhoidectomy (MMH), and to identify risk factors for postoperative recurrence.
methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on 330 patients with stage III-IV mixed hemorrhoids treated between January 2020 and December 2024. Patients underwent either ERBL+EH (n = 185) or MMH (n = 145). Baseline data, perioperative indicators, complications, treatment costs, and 1-year recurrence were assessed. Follow-up was conducted every 3 months. Group differences were analyzed using χ
resultsBaseline characteristics were comparable between groups (P > 0.05). ERBL+EH demonstrated significantly better perioperative outcomes, including reduced blood loss, shorter operation and wound healing times, faster pain relief, fewer incisions, and lower postoperative pain scores (all P < 0.05). Complication rates were lower in the ERBL+EH group, particularly anal stenosis, prolapse, incontinence, urinary retention, and incision edema, though postoperative bleeding rates were similar between groups. At 1 year, recurrence was significantly reduced with ERBL+EH (9.7% vs. 31.0%, P < 0.001), with longer time to recurrence (10 vs. 6 months, P = 0.025). Treatment costs were higher in the ERBL+EH group, but length of hospital stay was similar. Clinical efficacy showed a higher rate of marked improvement in the ERBL+EH group (P < 0.001). Multivariate Cox regression identified ERBL+EH as a protective factor against recurrence (HR = 0.218, P = 0.006), while stage IV disease, diabetes, spicy diet, and anal prolapse were independent risk factors.
conclusionERBL+EH is superior to MMH in perioperative outcomes, complication control, and recurrence reduction, offering a safe and effective treatment for mixed hemorrhoids, albeit at higher cost. Appropriate patient selection and optimized postoperative management may further enhance long-term outcomes.
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.