Clinical Application Studies of EPH and PPH: Randomized Controlled Trials

Abstract

Background: Compared with PPH, EPH is effective and safe in the treatment of mixed hemorrhoids caused by anal pad displacement. Objective The purpose of this study was to study the efficacy of EPH and PPH, and to compare the differences in operative time, postoperative pain, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative complications, and medical costs between them. Methods: This study was a randomized controlled trial of 200 patients with mixed hemorrhoids. PPH was performed in 100 cases, and EPH was performed in the other 100 cases. Postoperative follow-up was conducted to evaluate the operative time, postoperative pain, surgical blood loss, postoperative complications, and economic cost of treatment in the two groups. The data was analyzed using SPSS17.0. A P<0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: There was no statistical significance in age and illness between the two groups. Compared with PPH, EPH had statistical significance in operative time, operative blood loss, surgical complications, and economic cost of treatment, but had no statistical significance in postoperative pain. Conclusion: EPH has fewer complications than PPH, and PPH may have bleeding, metal stapling implantation, stapling anastomotic stenosis, etc. In terms of health economics, the cost of surgical materials for patients was reduced by two groups of surgical materials. Trial Registration: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChicTR2000037960. Funding Statement: Shanghai Pudong New Area Science and Technology Development Fund Innovation Fund Project (Project No. : PKJ2010-Y22). Declaration of Interests: No conflict of interest. Ethics Approval Statement: IRB Exemption from the Ethics Society Committee of Punan Hospital. Number: 2010 KT200312.