• Home
  • Browse
    • Current Issue
    • By Issue
    • By Author
    • By Subject
    • Author Index
    • Keyword Index
  • Journal Info
    • About Journal
    • Aims and Scope
    • Editorial Board
    • Publication Ethics
    • Peer Review Process
  • Guide for Authors
  • Submit Manuscript
  • Contact Us
 
  • Login
  • Register
Home Articles List Article Information
  • Save Records
  • |
  • Printable Version
  • |
  • Recommend
  • |
  • How to cite Export to
    RIS EndNote BibTeX APA MLA Harvard Vancouver
  • |
  • Share Share
    CiteULike Mendeley Facebook Google LinkedIn Twitter
The Egyptian Journal of Hospital Medicine
arrow Articles in Press
arrow Current Issue
Journal Archive
Volume Volume 99 (2025)
Volume Volume 98 (2025)
Volume Volume 97 (2024)
Volume Volume 96 (2024)
Volume Volume 95 (2024)
Volume Volume 94 (2024)
Volume Volume 93 (2023)
Volume Volume 92 (2023)
Volume Volume 91 (2023)
Volume Volume 90 (2023)
Volume Volume 89 (2022)
Volume Volume 88 (2022)
Volume Volume 87 (2022)
Volume Volume 86 (2022)
Volume Volume 85 (2021)
Volume Volume 84 (2021)
Volume Volume 83 (2021)
Volume Volume 82 (2021)
Volume Volume 81 (2020)
Volume Volume 80 (2020)
Volume Volume 79 (2020)
Volume Volume 78 (2020)
Volume Volume 77 (2019)
Volume Volume 76 (2019)
Volume Volume 75 (2019)
Volume Volume 74 (2019)
Volume Volume 73 (2018)
Volume Volume 72 (2018)
Volume Volume 71 (2018)
Issue Issue 1
Issue Issue 2
Issue Issue 3
Issue Issue 4
Issue Issue 5
Issue Issue 6
Issue Issue 7
Volume Volume 70 (2018)
Volume Volume 69 (2017)
Volume Volume 68 (2017)
Volume Volume 67 (2017)
Volume Volume 66 (2017)
Volume Volume 65 (2016)
Volume Volume 64 (2016)
Volume Volume 63 (2016)
Volume Volume 62 (2016)
Volume Volume 61 (2015)
Volume Volume 60 (2015)
Volume Volume 59 (2015)
Volume Volume 58 (2015)
Volume Volume 57 (2014)
Volume Volume 56 (2014)
Volume Volume 55 (2014)
Volume Volume 54 (2014)
Volume Volume 53 (2013)
Volume Volume 52 (2013)
Volume Volume 51 (2013)
Volume Volume 50 (2013)
Volume Volume 49 (2012)
Volume Volume 48 (2012)
Volume Volume 47 (2012)
Volume Volume 46 (2012)
Volume Volume 45 (2011)
Volume Volume 44 (2011)
Volume Volume 43 (2011)
Volume Volume 42 (2011)
Volume Volume 41 (2010)
Volume Volume 40 (2010)
Volume Volume 39 (2010)
Volume Volume 38 (2010)
Volume Volume 37 (2009)
Volume Volume 36 (2009)
Volume Volume 35 (2009)
Volume Volume 34 (2009)
Volume Volume 33 (2008)
Volume Volume 32 (2008)
Volume Volume 31 (2008)
Volume Volume 30 (2008)
Volume Volume 29 (2007)
Volume Volume 28 (2007)
Volume Volume 27 (2007)
Volume Volume 26 (2007)
Volume Volume 25 (2006)
Volume Volume 24 (2006)
Volume Volume 23 (2006)
Volume Volume 22 (2006)
Volume Volume 21 (2005)
Volume Volume 20 (2005)
Volume Volume 19 (2005)
Volume Volume 18 (2005)
Volume Volume 17 (2004)
Volume Volume 16 (2004)
Volume Volume 15 (2004)
Volume Volume 14 (2004)
Volume Volume 13 (2003)
Volume Volume 12 (2003)
Volume Volume 11 (2003)
Volume Volume 10 (2003)
Volume Volume 9 (2002)
Volume Volume 8 (2002)
Volume Volume 7 (2002)
Volume Volume 6 (2002)
Volume Volume 5 (2001)
Volume Volume 4 (2001)
Volume Volume 3 (2001)
Volume Volume 2 (2001)
Volume Volume 1 (2000)
Muhammad M Allam, A. (2018). Conventional Hemorrhoidectomy versus Ligasure Hemorrhoidectomy: A Comparative Study. The Egyptian Journal of Hospital Medicine, 71(5), 3116-3120.
Al Sayed A Hamdy, Yaser H Hasan, Muhammad M Allam. "Conventional Hemorrhoidectomy versus Ligasure Hemorrhoidectomy: A Comparative Study". The Egyptian Journal of Hospital Medicine, 71, 5, 2018, 3116-3120.
Muhammad M Allam, A. (2018). 'Conventional Hemorrhoidectomy versus Ligasure Hemorrhoidectomy: A Comparative Study', The Egyptian Journal of Hospital Medicine, 71(5), pp. 3116-3120.
Muhammad M Allam, A. Conventional Hemorrhoidectomy versus Ligasure Hemorrhoidectomy: A Comparative Study. The Egyptian Journal of Hospital Medicine, 2018; 71(5): 3116-3120.

Conventional Hemorrhoidectomy versus Ligasure Hemorrhoidectomy: A Comparative Study

Article 6, Volume 71, Issue 5, April 2018, Page 3116-3120  XML PDF (350.25 K)
Document Type: Original Article
View on SCiNiTO View on SCiNiTO
Author
Al Sayed A Hamdy, Yaser H Hasan, Muhammad M Allam email
Department of General Surgery, Faculty of Medicine – Al-Azhar University
Abstract
Background: Hemorrhoidal disease is one of the most common anorectal diseases and surgical hemorrhoidectomy remains one of the most common operations in general surgery. Milligan-Morgan Described the conventional hemorrhoidectomy since about 70 years ago, then surgical hemorrhoidectomy had changed little over years until the introduction of LigaSure hemorrhoidectomy. Aim of the Work: Is to compare between conventional (Milligan-Morgan) hemorrhoidectomy and LigaSure hemorrhoidectomy in treating patients with 3rd and 4th degree internal piles. Patients and Methods: This randomized control clinical trial was done at Mounira General Hospital over a period from April 2017 to March 2018 on the basis of: It included 40 adult patients with 3rd and 4th degree hemorrhoids divided randomly into 2 equal groups: Group A (n: 20 patients) underwent LigaSure hemorrhoidectomy. Group B (n: 20 patients) underwent Conventional hemorrhoidectomy. Results: There was a highly significant difference between the two study groups as regard the operative time, in the LigaSure hemorrhoidectomy group the mean operative time was 11.15 ± 2.68 minutes, while in the conventional technique group the mean time was 28.75 ± 4.20 minutes. As regards the post-operative pain, in the 1st day, there was a highly significant difference between the two study groups; in the LigaSure hemorrhoidectomy group the mean post-operative pain was 3.80 ± 1.54; while in the conventional technique it was 5.95 ± 0.99. Regarding the post-operative pain, in the 1st week, the LigaSure hemorrhoidectomy group mean was 2.60 ± 1.27; while in the conventional method was 4.80±0.89. As regard the intra-operative estimated blood loss, a significant difference between the two study groups was present. In ligaSure hemorrhoidectomy group 40% had almost no bleeding, 20% had minimal blood loss, 20% had mild loss and 20% had moderate blood loss in comparison with conventional method group patients; 0% with no blood loss, 15% with minimal loss, 55% with mild loss and 30% with moderate blood loss. As regards duration of wound healing, in the LigaSure group, the mean time was 2.65 ± 0.74 weeks while in the in the conventional technique group, it was 4.60 ± 0.82 weeks which was statistically highly significant. With LigaSure hemorrhoidectomy only 6 patients out of 20 needed anal packing, in contrast with conventional method group that needed an anal pack for the whole 20 patients. Conclusion: We conclude that LigaSure hemorrhoidectomy is better than conventional (Milligan-Morgan) hemorrhoidectomy in terms of less operative time, less intra-operative blood loss, less post-operative pain, less post-operative analgesics and earlier wound healing and return to daily work hence higher patient satisfaction. Recommendations: Further studies on a larger scale of patients are needed to confirm the results obtained by this work.
Keywords
LigaSure Hemorrhoidectomy; Conventional Hemorrhoidectomy; Milligan-Morgan
Statistics
Article View: 248
PDF Download: 516
Home | Glossary | News | Aims and Scope | Sitemap
Top Top

Journal Management System. Designed by NotionWave.