Comparison of a Hemorrhoidectomy With Ultrasonic Scalpel Versus a Conventional Hemorrhoidectomy.

Abstract

PurposeA variety of instruments, including circular staplers, ultrasonic scalpels, lasers, and bipolar electrothermal devices, are currently used when performing a hemorrhoidectomy. This study compared outcomes between hemorrhoidectomies performed with an ultrasonic scalpel and conventional methods.MethodsThe study was a randomized prospective review of data available between May 2013 and December 2013, involving 50 patients who had undergone a hemorrhoidectomy for grade III or IV internal hemorrhoids. The hemorrhoidal pedicle was coagulated with an ultrasonic device in the ultrasonic scalpel group (n = 25) and sutured with 3-0 vicryl material after excision in the conventional method group (n = 25).ResultsThe patients' demographics, clinical characteristics, and lengths of hospital stay were similar in both groups. The mean ages of the conventional and the ultrasonic scalpel groups were, respectively, 20.8 ± 1.6 and 22.4 ± 5.0 years (P = 0.240). In comparison with the conventional method group, the ultrasonic scalpel group had a shorter operation time (P < 0.005), less postoperative pain on the visual analogue scale score (for example, P = 0.211 on postoperative day 1), and less postoperative bleeding (P = 0.034). No significant differences in postoperative complications were observed between the 2 groups.ConclusionA hemorrhoidectomy using an ultrasonic scalpel is an effective and safe procedure. The ultrasonic scalpel reduces the operation time, the postoperative blood loss, and the postoperative pain. Long-term follow-up with larger-scale studies is required to evaluate normal activity after a hemorrhoidectomy performed with an ultrasonic scalpel.