Peter Labas, Bernard Ohradka, Marek Cambal, Juraj Olejnik, Juraj Fillo
{"title":"Haemorrhoidectomy in outpatient practice.","authors":"Peter Labas, Bernard Ohradka, Marek Cambal, Juraj Olejnik, Juraj Fillo","doi":"10.1080/11024150201680008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate our results of haemorrhoidectomy done as an outpatient procedure.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Retrospective study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>University hospital Bratislava, Slovak Republic.</p><p><strong>Subject: </strong>256 patients who required haemorrhoidectomy in 1996-2001.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>Milligan-Morgan haemorrhoidectomy under local (0.5% lignocaine with adrenaline 1:200,000, 100 ml) or epidural (0.5 bupivacaine, marcain, 20 ml; or 1% lignocaine, 20 ml).</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Mortality, morbidity, need for admission to hospital, and acceptability to patients.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No patient died. All patients were observed in the recovery room for 0.5-8 hours (mean 5 hours). 23 of the 256 patients (9%) developed minor complications including bleeding (n = 6), pain (n = 15), anal discharge (n = 1), and retention of urine (n = 1). 5 patients (2%) were admitted for pain or retention of urine. During the first 3 days after operation 29 patients required increased analgesia for discomfort. 223 patients (87%) were satisfied with outpatient treatment, while the remaining would have preferred to be admitted to hospital.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Day case haemorrhoidectomy is a safe and effective way of reducing costs without increasing morbidity, mortality, and is acceptable to most patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":22411,"journal":{"name":"The European journal of surgery = Acta chirurgica","volume":"168 11","pages":"619-20"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2002-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"18","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The European journal of surgery = Acta chirurgica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/11024150201680008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 18
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate our results of haemorrhoidectomy done as an outpatient procedure.
Design: Retrospective study.
Setting: University hospital Bratislava, Slovak Republic.
Subject: 256 patients who required haemorrhoidectomy in 1996-2001.
Interventions: Milligan-Morgan haemorrhoidectomy under local (0.5% lignocaine with adrenaline 1:200,000, 100 ml) or epidural (0.5 bupivacaine, marcain, 20 ml; or 1% lignocaine, 20 ml).
Main outcome measures: Mortality, morbidity, need for admission to hospital, and acceptability to patients.
Results: No patient died. All patients were observed in the recovery room for 0.5-8 hours (mean 5 hours). 23 of the 256 patients (9%) developed minor complications including bleeding (n = 6), pain (n = 15), anal discharge (n = 1), and retention of urine (n = 1). 5 patients (2%) were admitted for pain or retention of urine. During the first 3 days after operation 29 patients required increased analgesia for discomfort. 223 patients (87%) were satisfied with outpatient treatment, while the remaining would have preferred to be admitted to hospital.
Conclusion: Day case haemorrhoidectomy is a safe and effective way of reducing costs without increasing morbidity, mortality, and is acceptable to most patients.