Comparative study between conventional versus stapling hemorrhoidectomy in the management of hemorrhoid

Background and aim Hemorrhoidectomy is considered an efficient technique for third-degree and fourth-degree hemorrhoids. Due to its painful postoperative recovery, many patients avoid hemorrhoidectomy. However, advances in medical technology and pathophysiology have led to stapled hemorrhoidal surgery. This study aimed to compare the outcome of the management of hemorrhoids by conventional hemorrhoidectomy versus stapling hemorrhoidectomy. Patients and methods The study included 80 cases with hemorrhoids assigned at random into two groups: group A had Milligan–Morgan conventional hemorrhoidectomy and group B had stapling hemorrhoidectomy. The different outcomes were reported and compared between the two study groups, including operative time, duration of hospitalization, postoperative pain, the incidence of complications including urine incontinence, bleeding, wound infection, incontinence, recurrence, and perianal fistula, and the duration to perform normal daily activities. Results The operation time was significantly less in the stapled technique group than in the conventional technique group ( P =0.008). The duration of postoperative stay at the hospital was significantly longer in the conventional technique group ( P <0.001). The degree of pain during rest and defecation was significantly higher in the conventional technique group ( P <0.001). The degree of patients’ satisfaction was better in the stapled technique group as compared to the conventional technique group ( P =0.032). The duration of return to daily activity was significantly longer in the conventional technique group ( P <0.001). Conclusion Stapled hemorrhoidectomy reduced intraoperative blood loss, recurrence rate, and postoperative complications while maintaining fecal continence, making it better than conventional hemorrhoidectomy for third-degree and fourth-degree circumferential piles.