Journal Basic Info
- Impact Factor: 1.995**
- H-Index: 8
- ISSN: 2474-1647
- DOI: 10.25107/2474-1647
- Thoracic Surgery
- Robotic Surgery
- Ophthalmic Surgery
- Endocrine Surgery
- Breast Surgery
- Surgical Oncology
- Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
- Emergency Surgery
Citation: Clin Surg. 2016;1(1):1242.Research Article | Open Access
Department of General Surgery, Cairo University, Egypt
These two authors equally contributed
Purpose: The aim of this study was to compare the outcome of patients receiving hemorrhoidectomy using ultrasonic coagulation versus conventional hemorrhoidectomy.Methods: Twenty patients with grade 3 to 4 piles were randomly assigned using closed envelope method to receive 1) Modified Milligan-Morgan hemorrhoidectomy using scissors excision-ligation technique followed by hemostasis using diathermy or 2) Ultrasonic coagulation hemorrhoidectomy. The patient was not aware of the technique used at operation. Patients were followed up weeks after operation. The measured outcomes included 1) operation time; 2) blood loss; 3) postoperative hospital stay; 4) pain score; 5) wound healing duration 6) wound infection.Results: There was high statistical difference between ultrasonic coagulation over conventional hemorrhoidectomy regarding intraoperative blood loss, operative time, wound healing and duration, post operative pain in day 1 & 2, no difference was shown in post operative pain after 1 week.
Conclusion: The study shows that the ultrasonic coagulation is superior to the conventional hemorrhoidectomy regarding intraoperative blood loss, operative time, and wound healing and early post operative pain.
Harmonic scalpel; Ultrasonic coagulation; Hemorrhoidectomy; Milligan & Morgan
Cite the article
Elbarmelgi MY, Farag AFA. Comparative Study of Outcome of Conventional versus Ultrasonic Coagulation Hemorrhoidectomy. Clin Surg. 2016; 1: 1242.