G Galizia, E Lieto, P Castellano, L Pelosio, V Imperatore, C Pigantelli
{"title":"外侧内括约肌切开术联合痔疮切除术治疗痔疮:一项随机前瞻性研究。","authors":"G Galizia, E Lieto, P Castellano, L Pelosio, V Imperatore, C Pigantelli","doi":"10.1080/110241500750009320","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To investigate anorectal manometric findings in patients with haemorrhoids and to evaluate the clinical effects and physiological consequences of adding a lateral internal sphincterotomy (LIS) to haemorrhoidectomy.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Randomised prospective study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Teaching hospital, Naples.</p><p><strong>Patients: </strong>48 consecutive patients with prolapsed piles who had anorectal manometry; 10 healthy volunteers served as controls.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>Resting and squeeze pressures, sphincter length and rectoanal inhibitory reflex were recorded. 6 patients were excluded because anal pressures were not raised, so 42 patients were randomised. 22 patients had haemorrhoidectomy plus LIS; and 20 had haemorrhoidectomy alone.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Morbidity, continence, and anorectal manometry.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sphincter anomalies were found in 87.5% (n = 42) of patients. Haemorrhoidectomy alone did not affect anal pressures, which returned to the normal ranges after sphincterotomy. Those who had LIS did better postoperatively than those who had did not. 4 patients who did not have a sphincterotomy developed anal strictures. No patient who had LIS developed incontinence of faeces.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>High anal pressures are common in patients with haemorrhoids suggesting that they may have a pathogenetic role; anorectal manometry is useful in the investigation of anal pressure patterns; and when indicated, lateral sphincterotomy avoids pain, urinary retention, and stenosis, and is safe.</p>","PeriodicalId":22411,"journal":{"name":"The European journal of surgery = Acta chirurgica","volume":"166 3","pages":"223-8"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2000-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/110241500750009320","citationCount":"59","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Lateral internal sphincterotomy together with haemorrhoidectomy for treatment of haemorrhoids: a randomised prospective study.\",\"authors\":\"G Galizia, E Lieto, P Castellano, L Pelosio, V Imperatore, C Pigantelli\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/110241500750009320\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To investigate anorectal manometric findings in patients with haemorrhoids and to evaluate the clinical effects and physiological consequences of adding a lateral internal sphincterotomy (LIS) to haemorrhoidectomy.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Randomised prospective study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Teaching hospital, Naples.</p><p><strong>Patients: </strong>48 consecutive patients with prolapsed piles who had anorectal manometry; 10 healthy volunteers served as controls.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>Resting and squeeze pressures, sphincter length and rectoanal inhibitory reflex were recorded. 6 patients were excluded because anal pressures were not raised, so 42 patients were randomised. 22 patients had haemorrhoidectomy plus LIS; and 20 had haemorrhoidectomy alone.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Morbidity, continence, and anorectal manometry.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sphincter anomalies were found in 87.5% (n = 42) of patients. Haemorrhoidectomy alone did not affect anal pressures, which returned to the normal ranges after sphincterotomy. Those who had LIS did better postoperatively than those who had did not. 4 patients who did not have a sphincterotomy developed anal strictures. No patient who had LIS developed incontinence of faeces.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>High anal pressures are common in patients with haemorrhoids suggesting that they may have a pathogenetic role; anorectal manometry is useful in the investigation of anal pressure patterns; and when indicated, lateral sphincterotomy avoids pain, urinary retention, and stenosis, and is safe.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22411,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The European journal of surgery = Acta chirurgica\",\"volume\":\"166 3\",\"pages\":\"223-8\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2000-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/110241500750009320\",\"citationCount\":\"59\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The European journal of surgery = Acta chirurgica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/110241500750009320\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The European journal of surgery = Acta chirurgica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/110241500750009320","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Lateral internal sphincterotomy together with haemorrhoidectomy for treatment of haemorrhoids: a randomised prospective study.
Objective: To investigate anorectal manometric findings in patients with haemorrhoids and to evaluate the clinical effects and physiological consequences of adding a lateral internal sphincterotomy (LIS) to haemorrhoidectomy.
Design: Randomised prospective study.
Setting: Teaching hospital, Naples.
Patients: 48 consecutive patients with prolapsed piles who had anorectal manometry; 10 healthy volunteers served as controls.
Interventions: Resting and squeeze pressures, sphincter length and rectoanal inhibitory reflex were recorded. 6 patients were excluded because anal pressures were not raised, so 42 patients were randomised. 22 patients had haemorrhoidectomy plus LIS; and 20 had haemorrhoidectomy alone.
Main outcome measures: Morbidity, continence, and anorectal manometry.
Results: Sphincter anomalies were found in 87.5% (n = 42) of patients. Haemorrhoidectomy alone did not affect anal pressures, which returned to the normal ranges after sphincterotomy. Those who had LIS did better postoperatively than those who had did not. 4 patients who did not have a sphincterotomy developed anal strictures. No patient who had LIS developed incontinence of faeces.
Conclusions: High anal pressures are common in patients with haemorrhoids suggesting that they may have a pathogenetic role; anorectal manometry is useful in the investigation of anal pressure patterns; and when indicated, lateral sphincterotomy avoids pain, urinary retention, and stenosis, and is safe.