Stapled haemorrhoidectomy is as effective as conventional haemorrhoidectomy. Reduced postoperative pain, shorter hospital stay and a trend toward earlier return to work suggest short-term advantages for the stapled technique.

Hemorrhoidal disease (HD) is the most common proctological disease in the Western countries. However, its real prevalence is underestimated due to the frequent self-medication. The aim of this consensus statement is to provide evidence-based data to allow an individualized and appropriate management and treatment of HD. The strategy used to search for evidence was based on application of electronic sources such as MEDLINE, PubMed, Cochrane Review Library, CINAHL, and EMBASE. These guidelines are inclusive and not prescriptive. The recommendations were defined and graded based on the current levels of evidence and in accordance with the criteria adopted by American College of Chest Physicians. The recommendations were graded A, B, and C.

Stapled hemorrhoidectomy (SH), a new approach to the treatment of hemorrhoids, removes a circumferential strip of mucosa about four centimeters above the dentate line. A review of 1,107 patients treated with SH from twelve Italian coloproctological centers has revealed a 15% (164/1,107) complication rate. Immediate complications (first week) were: severe pain in 5.0% of all patients, bleeding (4.2%), thrombosis (2.3%), urinary retention (1.5%), anastomotic dehiscence (0.5%), fissure (0.2%), perineal intramural hematoma (0.1%), and submucosal abscess (0.1%). Bleeding was treated surgically in 24%, with Foley insertion 15%; and by epinephrine infiltration in 2%; 53% of patients with bleeding received no treatment and 6% needed transfusion. One patient with anastomotic dehiscence needed pelvic drainage and colostomy formation. The most common complication after 1 week was recurrence of hemorrhoids in 2.3% of patients, severe pain (1.7%), stenosis (0.8%), fissure (0.6%), bleeding (0.5%), skin tag (0.5%), thrombosis (0.4%), papillary hypertrophy (0.3%) fecal urency (0.2%), staples problems (0.2%), gas flatus and fecal incontinence (0.2%), intramural abscess, partial dehiscence, mucosal septum and intussusception (each <0.1%). Recurrent hemorrhoids were treated by ligation in 40% and by Milligan-Morgan procedure in 32%. All hemorrhoidal thromboses were excised. Anal stenoses were treated by dilatation in 55% and by anoplasty in 45%. Fissure was treated by dilatation in 57%. Most complications (65%) occurred after the surgeon had more than 25 case experiences of stapled hemorrhoidectomy. The most common complication in the first 25 cases of the surgeon's experience was bleeding (48%). Even though SH appears to be promising, we feel that a multicenter randomized study with a long-term follow-up comparing SH and banding is necessary before recommending the procedure. Most complications can be avoided by respecting the rectal wall anatomy in the execution of the procedure.

Stapled transanal rectal resection achieved acceptable results at the cost of a high reoperation rate. Patients with puborectalis dyssynergia and lower bowel frequency may do worse because surgery does not address the causes of their constipation. Patients with large rectoceles, enteroceles, digitation, and a sense of incomplete evacuation may have more advanced pelvic floor disease for which stapled transanal rectal resection, which simply removes redundant tissue, may not be adequate. This, together with the complications observed in patients referred after stapled transanal rectal resection, suggests that this procedure should be performed by colorectal surgeons and in carefully selected patients.

The study was designed to compare LigaSure haemorrhoidectomy with open haemorrhoidectomy performed by means of diathermy excision. Fifty-sixty consecutive patients with third- and fourth-degree haemorrhoids were randomly allocated to undergo either LigaSure haemorrhoidectomy (29 patients) or diathermy haemorrhoidectomy (27 patients). All patients were evaluated for operative time, pain, post-operative analgesic requirements, time to first bowel movement, length of hospital stay, wound healing period, time to return to work, and occurrence of early postoperative complications (such as urinary dysfunction, bleeding, soiling, seepage, continence disorders) and late complications (such as stenosis). A statistically significant advantage was observed in the patients who received the LigaSure technique as far as concerns length of operative time (9.2 vs. 12.2 min, p<0.001), post-operative analgesic requirements (14.1 vs. 16.8 administrations, p<0.001), wound healing period (16.3 vs. 37.5 days, p< 0.0001), and time to return to work (8.3 vs. 18.3 days, p<0.01). No significant difference was seen in the postoperative pain score, complications rate, first bowel motion or hospital stay. No recurrence was observed at the 6-month follow-up. In conclusion, our experience shows that the LigaSure haemorrhoidectomy offers definite advantages over the classic diathermy technique. This procedure is easier, safer, and more rapid to perform and is followed by a faster wound healing time, a significantly shorter hospital stay, less postoperative pain and faster wound healing.