SynthesisBMC surgery2026
Laser hemorrhoidoplasty versus LigaSure hemorrhoidectomy for grade II-IV hemorrhoidal disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC surgery, 2026. 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.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMany surgical procedures have been developed to treat hemorrhoidal disease. Although conventional excisional techniques are effective, they are also associated with significant postoperative pain and longer recovery times. Consequently, newer techniques have been introduced to address these issues, including laser hemorrhoidoplasty (LHP) and LigaSure hemorrhoidectomy (LigH). This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to compare these two approaches in terms of perioperative outcomes and recurrence.
methodsA comprehensive search was conducted across PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Google Scholar, up to December 2025. We included all eligible studies involving adults with grade II-IV hemorrhoids. Primary outcomes included postoperative pain, time to return to routine activities, and recurrence. Secondary outcomes were operative time, length of hospital stay, and complications. The risk of bias was assessed using the RoB2 and ROBINS-I V2 tools. Meta-analyses were performed with a random-effects model. The certainty of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE approach.
resultsData from 461 patients (213 LHP, 248 LigH) across five studies were analyzed. Patients in the LHP group reported significantly lower pain scores on postoperative day 1 (MD: - 1.61 points; p = 0.025), earlier return to routine activities (MD: -5.75 days; p = 0.0002), shorter operative time (MD: -6.5 min; p = 0.002), and shorter hospital stay (MD: -0.3 days; p < 0.0001) compared to the LigH group. Conversely, LigH demonstrated a significantly lower risk of recurrence (RD: 0.12; 95% CI: [0.05, 0.19]). No significant differences were observed regarding postoperative bleeding, wound infection, urinary retention, or thrombosis.
conclusionLHP yields better perioperative outcomes, including less pain and faster recovery, making it a favorable option for patient comfort. However, LigH has lower recurrence rates. The certainty of evidence is very low. Further high-quality randomized trials are needed to confirm these results.
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.