Excisional Hemorrhoidectomy Versus Dearterialization With Mucopexy for the Treatment of Grade III Hemorrhoidal Disease: The EMODART3 Multicenter Study

Background: Over the past few decades, several surgical approaches have been proposed to treat hemorrhoids. Objective: This multicenter study aimed to compare transanal hemorrhoidal artery ligation and conventional excisional hemorrhoidectomy for grade III hemorrhoidal disease. Design: Multicenter retrospective study. Settings: Any center belonging to the Italian Society of Colorectal Surgery in which at least 30 surgical procedures per year for hemorrhoidal disease were performed was able to join the study. Patients: Clinical data from patients with Goligher's grade III hemorrhoidal disease who underwent excisional hemorrhoidectomy or hemorrhoidal artery ligation were retrospectively analyzed after a 24-month follow-up period. Main outcome measures: The primary aims were to evaluate the adoption of 2 different surgical techniques and to compare them in terms of symptoms, postoperative adverse events, and recurrences at a 24-month follow-up. Results: Data from 1681 patients were analyzed. The results of both groups were comparable in terms of postoperative clinical score by multiple regression analysis and matched case-control analysis. Patients who underwent excisional hemorrhoidectomy had a significantly higher risk of postoperative complication (adjusted OR = 1.58; p = 0.006). A secondary analysis highlighted that excisional hemorrhoidectomy performed with new devices and hemorrhoidal artery ligation reported a significantly lower risk for complications than excisional hemorrhoidectomy performed with traditional monopolar diathermy. At the 24-month follow-up assessment, recurrence was significantly higher in the hemorrhoidal artery ligation group (adjusted OR = 0.50; p = 0.001). A secondary analysis did not show a higher risk of recurrences based on the type of device. Limitations: The retrospective design and the self-reported nature of data from different centers. Conclusions: Hemorrhoidal artery ligation is an effective option for grade III hemorrhoidal disease; however, it is burdened by a high risk of recurrences. Excisional hemorrhoidectomy performed with newer devices is competitive in terms of postoperative complications.HEMORROIDECTOMÍA POR ESCISIÓN VERSUS DESARTERIALIZACIÓN CON MUCOPEXIA PARA EL TRATAMIENTO DE LA ENFERMEDAD HEMORROIDAL DE GRADO 3: EL ESTUDIO MULTICÉNTRICO EMODART3ANTECEDENTES:En las últimas décadas se han propuesto varios abordajes quirúrgicos para el tratamiento de las hemorroides.OBJETIVO:Este estudio multicéntrico tiene como objetivo comparar la ligadura de la arteria hemorroidal transanal y la hemorroidectomía por escisión convencional para la enfermedad hemorroidal de grado III.DISEÑO:Estudio retrospectivo multicéntrico.ÁMBITO:Cualquier centro perteneciente a la Sociedad Italiana de Cirugía Colorrectal en el que se realizaron al menos 30 procedimientos quirúrgicos por año para la enfermedad hemorroidal pudo participar en el estudio.PACIENTES:Los datos clínicos de pacientes con enfermedad hemorroidal de grado III de Goligher que se sometieron a hemorroidectomía por escisión o ligadura de arterias hemorroidales se analizaron retrospectivamente después de un período de seguimiento de 24 meses.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Los objetivos primarios fueron evaluar la adopción de dos técnicas quirúrgicas diferentes y compararlas en términos de síntomas, eventos adversos posoperatorios y recurrencias a los 24 meses de seguimiento.RESULTADOS:Se analizaron datos de 1681 pacientes. Los 2 grupos resultaron ser comparables en términos de puntuación clínica posoperatoria mediante análisis de regresión múltiple y análisis de casos y controles emparejados. Los pacientes sometidos a hemorroidectomía excisional tuvieron un riesgo significativamente mayor de complicaciones posope