Open versus closed haemorrhoidectomy

Milligan–Morgan (Open) Versus Ferguson Haemorrhoidectomy (Closed): A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis of Published Randomized, Controlled Trials

“…1. Eleven randomized, controlled trials [22–32] encompassing 1326 patients undergoing CH or OH for third‐degree and fourth‐degree haemorrhoids were retrieved from the electronic databases. Six hundred and sixty‐three patients underwent CH and 663 patients underwent OH.…”

“…The methodological quality of included trials (Table 3) was assessed by the published guideline of Jadad et al and Chalmers et al [19, 20]. Five trials [25, 26, 29–31] were of poor quality due to lack of adequate randomization technique, absence of blinding, lack of power calculations and in‐adequate methods of concealment. Remaining six trials [22–24, 27, 28, 32] were considered of good quality due to adequate methodology following analysis of reported quality variables.…”