ArticleCureus2026
A Comparative Study Between Stapler Hemorrhoidopexy and Conventional Hemorrhoidectomy.
Article in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHemorrhoids are common anorectal disorders that frequently require surgical intervention. Conventional hemorrhoidectomy is effective but often associated with significant postoperative pain and prolonged recovery. Stapled hemorrhoidopexy has emerged as a less invasive alternative aimed at improving postoperative outcomes.
objectivesTo compare stapled hemorrhoidopexy and conventional hemorrhoidectomy with respect to operative parameters, postoperative pain, analgesic requirement, hospital stay, and postoperative complications.
methodsThis prospective comparative study was conducted in 50 patients with Grade II and III hemorrhoids who were divided into two groups: stapled hemorrhoidopexy (n = 25) and conventional hemorrhoidectomy (n = 25). All patients underwent standardized preoperative evaluation and surgery under spinal anesthesia. Operative duration, postoperative pain (visual analogue scale (VAS) score), duration of hospital stay, and complications were recorded.
resultsBaseline demographic and clinical characteristics were similar in the groups. Operative time was significantly shorter in the stapled group, with all procedures completed within 20 minutes, compared to longer durations in the conventional group (p < 0.001). VAS scores were significantly lower in the stapled group (2.40 ± 0.58 vs. 4.72 ± 0.46; p < 0.001), with reduced analgesic requirement. Hospital stay was significantly shorter following stapled hemorrhoidopexy (1.40 ± 0.58 vs. 2.38 ± 1.14 days; p < 0.001). Postoperative complications were more frequent in the conventional group, though differences were not statistically significant.
conclusionStapled hemorrhoidopexy offers significant advantages over conventional hemorrhoidectomy in terms of operative efficiency, postoperative pain, analgesic requirement, and hospital stay, with comparable safety in patients with Grade II and III hemorrhoids.
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.