Traditional Excisional Surgery Research Articles

Radiofrequency Rejuvenation of the "Tweener" Patient: Under, Over, or Through the Skin.

The demand for noninvasive facial rejuvenation continues to increase as younger, well-informed patients enter the aesthetic market. We refer to a subset of these patients as "tweeners," those who present with early signs of neck and facial aging, but who have not yet developed changes significant enough to warrant a traditional excisional surgery approach. Many of these patients are in search of a minimally invasive intervention, a bridge in between observation and surgery. The authors describe their experience with radiofrequency (RF) technology as an in-office tool to address the aging face in a select patient population. This review also attempts to comprehensively search the existing body of literature to describe the RF technologies and devices available for facial rejuvenation. The efficacy and safety profiles of the devices are discussed, and the devices are categorized by their method of RF delivery-over (contact), through (microneedle), and under (percutaneous) the skin.

Which is better: stapler haemorrhoidopexy vs traditional excisional surgery?

Background: Haemorrhoids are tortuous dilated veins within the submucosa of anal canal. They are external, internal or internoexternal. External haemorrhoids cause pain. Internal haemorrhoids are characterised by painless bleeding or prolapse. Various treatment options are available- dietary modification, band ligation, sclerosant therapy, cryosurgery, traditional excisional surgery (Milligan/Ferguson), stapler haemorrhoidopexy, Doppler guided haemorrhoidal artery ligation (DGHAL), application of harmonicscalpel and ligasure.Methods: Adult patients (>18 yrs) with grade II, III & grade IV haemorrhoids are randomly allotted in equal numbers to receive either stapler haemorrhoidopexy or traditional excisional surgery from July 2017 to December 2018. Post-operative complications, pain (using visual analogue scale), recurrence rate and the need for further surgery with these procedures were analysed in this 1 and half year study period.Results: Patients who underwent stapler haemorrhoidopexy had better temporary quality of life, but patients who underwent traditional excisional surgery had lesser recurrence.Conclusions: Overall, traditional excisional surgery should be the choice when compared to stapler haemorrhoidopexy.

A pragmatic multicentre randomised controlled trial comparing stapled haemorrhoidopexy with traditional excisional surgery for haemorrhoidal disease: the eTHoS study

Haemorrhoids are a benign anorectal condition and are highly prevalent in the UK population. Treatments involve clinic-based procedures and surgery. The surgical procedures available include stapled haemorrhoidopexy (SH) and traditional haemorrhoidectomy (TH), and over 25,000 operations are performed for haemorrhoids annually in the UK. The disease is therefore important both to patients and to health service commissioners. Debate remains as to which of these surgical procedures is the most clinically effective and cost-effective. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of SH with that of TH. A large, open two-arm parallel-group pragmatic multicentre randomised controlled trial involving 32 UK hospitals and a within-trial cost-benefit analysis. A discrete choice experiment was conducted to estimate benefits (willingness to pay). Patients with grades II-IV haemorrhoids who had not previously undergone SH or TH were included in the study. Participants were randomised to receive either SH or TH. Randomisation was minimised at 1 : 1, in accordance with baseline EuroQol-5 Dimensions, three-level version (EQ-5D-3L) score, haemorrhoid grade, sex and centre, via an automated system. The primary outcome was area under the quality-of-life curve measured using the EQ-5D-3L descriptive system over 24 months, and the primary economic outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Secondary outcomes included disease-specific quality of life, recurrence, complications, further interventions and costs. Between January 2011 and August 2014, 777 patients were randomised (389 to receive SH and 388 to receive TH). There were 774 participants included in the analysis as a result of one post-randomisation exclusion in the SH arm and two in the TH arm. SH was less painful than TH in the short term. Surgical complications were similar in both arms. EQ-5D-3L score was higher for the SH arm in the first 6 weeks after surgery, but over 24 months the TH group had significantly better EQ-5D-3L scores (-0.073, 95% confidence interval -0.140 to -0.006; p = 0.0342). Symptoms and further interventions were significantly fewer in the TH arm at 24 months. Continence was better in the TH arm and tenesmus occurred less frequently. The number of serious adverse events reported was 24 out of 337 (7.1%) for participants who received SH and 33 out of 352 (9.4%) for those who received TH. There were two deaths in the SH arm, both unrelated to the eTHoS (either Traditional Haemorrhoidectomy or Stapled haemorrhoidopexy for haemorrhoidal disease) study. Patient preference did not seem to influence the treatment difference. SH was dominated by TH as it cost more and was less effective. The net benefit for the TH arm was higher than that for the SH arm. Neither the participants nor the assessors were masked to treatment assignment and final recruitment was slightly short of the total target of 800. There were also substantial missing follow-up data. While patients who received SH had less short-term pain, after 6 weeks, recurrence rates, symptoms, re-interventions and quality-of-life measures all favoured TH. In addition, TH is cheaper. As part of a tailored management plan for haemorrhoids, TH should be considered over SH as the surgical treatment of choice for haemorrhoids refractory to clinic-based interventions. Perform an updated meta-analysis incorporating recently conducted European trials [eTHoS, HubBLe (haemorrhoidal artery ligation versus rubber band ligation for the management of symptomatic second-degree and third-degree haemorrhoids) and LingaLongo (Cost-effectiveness of New Surgical Treatments for Haemorrhoidal Disease)]. Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN80061723. This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 21, No. 70. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Cost Effectiveness of Stapled Haemorrhoidopexy and Traditional Excisional Surgery for the Treatment of Haemorrhoidal Disease

ObjectiveOur objective was to compare the cost effectiveness of stapled haemorrhoidopexy (SH) and traditional haemorrhoidectomy (TH) in the treatment of grade II–IV haemorrhoidal disease from the perspective of the UK national health service.MethodsAn economic evaluation was conducted alongside an open, two-arm, parallel-group, pragmatic, multicentre, randomised controlled trial conducted in several hospitals in the UK. Patients were randomised into either SH or TH surgery between January 2011 and August 2014 and were followed up for 24 months. Intervention and subsequent resource use data were collected using case review forms and questionnaires. Benefits were collected using the EQ-5D-3L (EuroQoL—five dimensions—three levels) instrument. The primary economic outcome was incremental cost measured in pounds (£), year 2016 values, relative to the incremental benefit, which was estimated using quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Cost and benefits accrued in the second year were discounted at 3.5%. The base-case analysis was based on imputed data. Uncertainty was explored using univariate sensitivity analyses.ResultsParticipants (n = 777) were randomised to SH (n = 389) or TH (n = 388). The mean cost of SH was £337 (95% confidence interval [CI] 251–423) higher than that of TH and the mean QALYs were −0.070 (95% CI −0.127 to −0.011) lower than for TH. The base-case cost-utility analysis indicated that SH has zero probability of being cost effective at both the £20,000 and the £30,000 threshold. Results from the sensitivity analyses were similar to those from the base-case analysis.ConclusionsThe evidence suggests that, on average, the total mean costs over the 24-month follow-up period were significantly higher for the SH arm than for the TH arm. The QALYs were also, on average, significantly lower for the SH arm. These results were supported by the sensitivity analyses. Therefore, in terms of cost effectiveness, TH is a superior surgical treatment for the management of grade II–IV haemorrhoids when compared with SH.

An Australian Mohs external quality assurance program.

Background: Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS) has been shown to be an effective treatment for non‐melanoma skin cancer.1 Squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) and basal cell carcinoma (BCC) are the most common type of skin cancers worldwide with an increasing incidence in both men and women. Treating SCC and BCC, together make up the greatest cost of cancer treatment in Australia: an estimated total of $AU345 million per year. MMS provides distinct advantages over traditional excisional surgery. It offers tissue‐sparing treatment of cutaneous neoplasms with a higher cure rate; 99% for primary BCC and 97% for primary SCC,2 and has been shown to be cost‐effective compared to traditional excisional surgery.3-5 The MMS technique involves mapping and staining the excised tissue and a specialised tissue sectioning process that enables visualisation of virtually all tissue margins and the precise localisation of any residual tumour. If any residual tumour is detected, the above process is repeated until the margin is tumour‐free. The resulting defect is then ready for repair as appropriate for the particular site. A key component of Mohs surgery is that the Mohs surgeon removing the tumour also examines the histological slides, thus eliminating the communication errors that can occur in a multidisciplinary laboratory approach. Therefore, the success rate of this procedure is dependent on the accurate microscopic evaluation of carefully mapped specimens. The Mohs surgeon must be able to translate abnormal findings on the tissue map into appropriate sequential tumour removal.6 A critical component of the technique is the surgeon's skill in interpreting histological specimens, and yet few studies have analysed Mohs surgeons’ capacity to read frozen sections.7 A small number of published studies have investigated the concordance of Mohs surgeons’ interpretation of frozen sections with that of dermatopathologists. The published concordance rates have been very high, i.e. above 95%.7-9 Nevertheless, no formal external quality assurance program (EQA) assessing the Mohs surgeon's diagnostic accuracy of interpreting frozen section existed in Australia previously. In 2012 the Mohs surgeon group was formed as a specialist subgroup of the Australasian College of Dermatologists (ACD). Part of the group's aim was to establish formal EQA for diagnostic Mohs frozen sections to maintain acceptable standards for the histological diagnostic capabilities of its Mohs surgeon members. In addition to maintaining standards, the group also aimed to have an educational and continued professional development aspect as well as to create a teaching library of Mohs frozen section slides. The American College of Mohs Surgeons (ACMS) has successfully run a diagnostic quality control exam on a frozen section dermatopathology program. Initially this was run annually at the ACMS annual scientific meeting, with physical slides and microscopes set up for members to undertake the program. In 2014 the ACMS ran their program for the first time as entirely computer based with virtual images. At its 2014 Annual Advisory Committee meeting the ACD Mohs surgeon group decided to establish its own diagnostic frozen section program. Hence, it was decided that an external and independent quality assurance program would be set up in conjunction with the well‐established Royal College of Pathologists Australia Quality Assurance Program (RCPAQAP). This alliance aimed to create an independent assessment of the proficiency testing in a professional and truly unbiased manner. In addition, the alliance allowed for a cost‐effective program that would be completely computer based from its inception, i.e. the pilot Mohs module for the purpose of EQA.

The HubBLe Trial: haemorrhoidal artery ligation (HAL) versus rubber band ligation (RBL) for symptomatic second- and third-degree haemorrhoids: a multicentre randomised controlled trial and health-economic evaluation.

Optimal surgical intervention for low-grade haemorrhoids is unknown. Rubber band ligation (RBL) is probably the most common intervention. Haemorrhoidal artery ligation (HAL) is a novel alternative that may be more efficacious. The comparison of HAL with RBL for the treatment of grade II/III haemorrhoids. A multicentre, parallel-group randomised controlled trial. UK NHS and Personal Social Services. 17 NHS Trusts. Patients aged ≥ 18 years presenting with grade II/III (second- and third-degree) haemorrhoids, including those who have undergone previous RBL. HAL with Doppler probe compared with RBL. Primary outcome - recurrence at 1 year post procedure; secondary outcomes - recurrence at 6 weeks; haemorrhoid severity score; European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions, 5-level version (EQ-5D-5L); Vaizey incontinence score; pain assessment; complications; and cost-effectiveness. A total of 370 participants entered the trial. At 1 year post procedure, 30% of the HAL group had evidence of recurrence compared with 49% after RBL [adjusted odds ratio (OR) = 2.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.42 to 3.51; p = 0.0005]. The main reason for the difference was the number of extra procedures required to achieve improvement/cure. If a single HAL is compared with multiple RBLs then only 37.5% recurred in the RBL arm (adjusted OR 1.35, 95% CI 0.85 to 2.15; p = 0.20). Persistence of significant symptoms at 6 weeks was lower in both arms than at 1 year (9% HAL and 29% RBL), suggesting significant deterioration in both groups over the year. Symptom score, EQ-5D-5L and Vaizey score improved in both groups compared with baseline, but there was no difference between interventions. Pain was less severe and of shorter duration in the RBL group; most of the HAL group who had pain had mild to moderate pain, resolving by 3 weeks. Complications were low frequency and not significantly different between groups. It appeared that HAL was not cost-effective compared with RBL. In the base-case analysis, the difference in mean total costs was £1027 higher for HAL. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were higher for HAL; however, the difference was very small (0.01) resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £104,427 per additional QALY. At 1 year, although HAL resulted in fewer recurrences, recurrence was similar to repeat RBL. Symptom scores, complications, EQ-5D-5L and continence score were no different, and patients had more pain in the early postoperative period after HAL. HAL is more expensive and unlikely to be cost-effective in terms of incremental cost per QALY. Blinding of participants and site staff was not possible. The incidence of recurrence may continue to increase with time. Further follow-up would add to the evidence regarding long-term clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. The polysymptomatic nature of haemorrhoidal disease requires a validated scoring system, and the data from this trial will allow further assessment of validity of such a system. These data add to the literature regarding treatment of grade II/III haemorrhoids. The results dovetail with results from the eTHoS study [Watson AJM, Hudson J, Wood J, Kilonzo M, Brown SR, McDonald A, et al. Comparison of stapled haemorrhoidopexy with traditional excisional surgery for haemorrhoidal disease (eTHoS): a pragmatic, multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2016, in press.] comparing stapled haemorrhoidectomy with excisional haemorrhoidectomy. Combined results will allow expansion of analysis, allowing surgeons to tailor their treatment options to individual patients. Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN41394716. This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 20, No. 88. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Comparison of stapled haemorrhoidopexy with traditional excisional surgery for haemorrhoidal disease (eTHoS): a pragmatic, multicentre, randomised controlled trial

SummaryBackgroundTwo commonly performed surgical interventions are available for severe (grade II–IV) haemorrhoids; traditional excisional surgery and stapled haemorrhoidopexy. Uncertainty exists as to which is most effective. The eTHoS trial was designed to establish the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of stapled haemorrhoidopexy compared with traditional excisional surgery.MethodsThe eTHoS trial was a large, open-label, multicentre, parallel-group, pragmatic randomised controlled trial done in adult participants (aged 18 years or older) referred to hospital for surgical treatment for grade II–IV haemorrhoids. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either traditional excisional surgery or stapled haemorrhoidopexy. Randomisation was minimised according to baseline EuroQol 5 dimensions 3 level score (EQ-5D-3L), haemorrhoid grade, sex, and centre with an automated system to stapled haemorrhoidopexy or traditional excisional surgery. The primary outcome was area under the quality of life curve (AUC) measured with the EQ-5D-3L descriptive system over 24 months, assessed according to the randomised groups. The primary outcome measure was analysed using linear regression with adjustment for the minimisation variables. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN80061723.FindingsBetween Jan 13, 2011, and Aug 1, 2014, 777 patients were randomised (389 to receive stapled haemorrhoidopexy and 388 to receive traditional excisional surgery). Stapled haemorrhoidopexy was less painful than traditional excisional surgery in the short term and surgical complication rates were similar between groups. The EQ-5D-3L AUC score was higher in the traditional excisional surgery group than the stapled haemorrhoidopexy group over 24 months; mean difference −0·073 (95% CI −0·140 to −0·006; p=0·0342). EQ-5D-3L was higher for stapled haemorrhoidopexy in the first 6 weeks after surgery, the traditional excisional surgery group had significantly better quality of life scores than the stapled haemorrhoidopexy group. 24 (7%) of 338 participants who received stapled haemorrhoidopexy and 33 (9%) of 352 participants who received traditional excisional surgery had serious adverse events.InterpretationAs part of a tailored management plan for haemorrhoids, traditional excisional surgery should be considered over stapled haemorrhoidopexy as the surgical treatment of choice.FundingNational Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

OC-093 A pragmatic multicentre randomised controlled trial comparing stapled haemorrhoidopexy to traditional excisional surgery for haemorrhoidal disease. the ethos trial

Introduction Haemorrhoidal disease is common in all age groups from the mid-teens onwards. Approximately 25,000 procedures were performed in England during 2006/2007 on hospital day-cases or inpatients. 1 Current interventions include traditional excisional surgery (TH) and stapled haemorrhoidopexy (SH). Uncertainty remains about how they compare. 2–6 The primary aim of eTHoS is to assess whether there is a difference between SH and TH 7 for the treatment of haemorrhoidal disease (grades II, III, and IV) on patient centred quality of life profile. Treatment costs will also be examined. Method Participants were randomly allocated to one of two study groups in equal proportion (SH or TH). Thirty-one sites from within the UK took part in the study. Patients, aged 18 year or older, with a diagnosis of circumferential haemorrhoids grade II–IV were eligible to take part. Randomisation utilised a minimisation algorithm which incorporated centre, grade of haemorrhoid (s), baseline EuroQol 5 Dimension health status questionnaire (EQ-5D) score and gender. The primary outcome for this study is patient-centred, quality of life profile (area under the curve (AUC) derived from EQ-5D data collected at baseline, 1 week, 3 weeks, 6 weeks, 12 months and 24 months; Economic, incremental cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained with QALYs were based on the responses to the EQ-5D. A sample size of n = 338 per group was calculated to provide 90% power to detect a difference in the mean area under the quality of life curve of 0.25 standard deviations (derived from EQ-5D score measurements, with a significance level of 5%). 400 were to be randomised to each group. Results The eTHoS trial closed for recruitment in August 2014 and is in follow-up. A total of 1129 patients were approached to take part in the trial. 777 participants were randomised (388 to TH and 389 to SH) with 7 post-randomisation exclusions from each group. Conclusion This trial is currently the largest of its type in the world. Our results will be reported in full in October 2016 to The National Institute for Health Research. Disclosure of interest None Declared. References NHS Information Centre UK; http://www.hesonline.nhs.uk/servlet/ContentServer?siteID=1937c95(2):147–60 Jayaraman S, et al . Dis Colon Rectum. 2007;50(9):1297–305 Burch J, et al . Health Technol Assess. 2008;12(8) Thaha MA, et al . Gut 2009;58(5):668–78 Shanmugam, et alet al. Colorectal Dis. 2010;12:579–86 Watson, et alet al. Trials 2014;15:439

What is the Technique without a Proper Classification?

Dear Sir, We read with interest the commentary by Morelli [1] and we are in agreement with the need to investigate the classifications evolution in association with the treatment techniques. This is the important conceptual message which is contained within the commentary. In fact, also in our experience [2], the classification has a significant effect on patient selection and choice of treatment.Recently, small randomized-controlled trials comparing stapled haemorrhoidopexy (SH) with traditional excisional surgery have shown it to be less painful and that is associated with quick recovery [3-6]. The reports also suggest a better patient’s acceptance and a higher compliance with day-case procedures potentially making it more economical. At the same time, several studies comparing SH and Milligan-Morgan (M-M) surgery demonstrated that stapled technique, associated with less pain in the immediate postoperative period, presents a higher risk of recurrence and residual prolapse, with necessity of reintervention and some other symptomatic treatment in long term follow-up [7-9]. Recently, several studies reported a higher percentage of haemorrhoid recurrence after SH, especially in patients with fourth degree haemorrhoids. They suggest that the treatment of second, third and fourth degree haemorrhoids by SH technique, gives optimal results in terms of less postoperative pain, faster return to work and shorter hospital stay, indicating a higher recurrence rate in fourth-degree haemorrhoids patients when the long-term evaluation is considered [8,10,11]. Therefore even if the SH is a safe and effective treatment for haemorrhoids, needs a rigorous patients selection. Furthermore, by applying the SH technique, there is the risk of intraoperative and immediate postoperative complications, such as closing or perforation of rectum, pelvic sepsis and mechanical circular suture dehiscence [10,11].Basing on the clinical evidence and literature revision, the decision to use SH or M-M, should be primarily based on the priorities and preferences of the patient (pain reduction and a rapid return to work / activities in the short-term, or reduction in the risk of recurrence in the long term), and the preference of the surgeon [12].A new technique based on doppler-guided ligation of the terminal branches of the superior haemorrhoidal artery was introduced in 1995 as an alternative to haemorrhoidectomy. Several studies reported that there are some terminal branches from the superior rectal artery-corresponding to the distribution of the anal cushions which varies widely in number and position.The rationale of this treatment was later supported by the findings from vascular studies, which demonstrated that patients with haemorrhoids had increased caliber and arterial blood flow of the terminal branch of the superior rectal arteries. Therefore, ligating the arterial supply to haemorrhoidal tissue by suture ligation may improve haemorrhoidal symptoms. DGHAL is most effective for second- or third-degree haemorrhoidsIn a study of Miyamoto et al. [13] is described that there were always more than three (usually six) terminal branches of haemorrhoidal

Stapled Haemorrhoidopexy Compared with Conventional Haemorrhoidectomy-A Systematic Review

Haemorrhoids are one of the most common anorectal disorders. Conventional haemorrhoidectomy (CH) is the most commonly practiced surgical technique. Stapled haemorrhoidopexy (SH) [procedure for prolapsed haemorrhoids (PPH)] is newly developed method for the surgical management of Haemorrhoids. This review looks at the surgical management of prolapsed haemorrhoids in light of this recent development and suggests a treatment approach based on this current evidence. A Medline, Pubmed and Cochrane data base search was performed using key words "haemorrhoid" or 'hemorrhoid' and staple. Relevant papers e.g. randomized controlled trials, review and metaanalyses from different parts of the world were collected. Data were analyzed and compiled. Though early small RCTs (stapled haemorrhoidopexy comparing with traditional excisional surgery) have shown stapled haemorrhoidopexy is less painful and it is associated with quicker recovery but recent large meta-analyses and long term follow up have shown SH is associated with a higher long term risk of haemorrhoid recurrence and symptoms of prolapse.DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3329/fmcj.v7i1.10297Faridpur Med. Coll. J. 2012;7(1): 37-41

Stapled versus conventional surgery for hemorrhoids

Hemorrhoids are one of the most common anorectal disorders. The Milligan‐Morgan open hemorrhoidectomy is the most widely practiced surgical technique used for the management of hemorrhoids and is considered the current "gold standard". Circular stapled hemorrhoidopexy was first described by Longo in 1998 as alternative to conventional excisional hemorrhoidectomy. Early, small randomized‐controlled trials comparing stapled hemorrhoidopexy with traditional excisional surgery have shown it to be less painful and that it is associated with quicker recovery. The reports also suggest a better patient acceptance and a higher compliance with day‐case procedures potentially making it more economical. A previous Cochrane Review of stapled hemorrhoidopexy and conventional excisional surgery has shown that the stapled technique is associated with a higher risk of recurrent hemorrhoids and some symptoms in long term follow‐up. Since this initial review, several more randomized controlled trials have been published that may shed more light on the differences between the novel stapled approach and conventional excisional techniques. This review compares the use of circular stapling devices and conventional excisional techniques in the surgical treatment of hemorrhoids. Its goal is to ascertain whether there is any difference in the outcomes of the two techniques in patients with symptomatic hemorrhoids. We searched all the major electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) from 1998 to December 2009. All randomized controlled trials comparing stapled hemorrhoidopexy to conventional excisional hemorrhoidal surgeries with a minimum follow‐up period of 6 months were included. Data were collected on a data sheet. When appropriate, an Odds Ratio was generated using a random effects model. Patients with SH were significantly more likely to have recurrent hemorrhoids in long term follow up at all time points than those with CH (12 trials, 955 patients, OR 3.22, CI 1.59‐6.51, p=0.001). There were 37 recurrences out of 479 patients in the stapled group versus only 9 out of 476 patients in the conventional group. Similarly, in trials where there was follow up of one year or more, SH was associated with a greater proportion of patients with hemorrhoid recurrence (5 trials, 417 patients, OR 3.60, CI 1.24‐10.49, p=0.02). Furthermore, a significantly higher proportion of patients with SH complained of the symptom of prolapse at all time points (13 studies, 1191 patients, OR 2.65, CI 1.45‐4.85, p=0.002). In studies with follow up of greater than one year, the same significant outcome was found (7 studies, 668 patients, OR 3.14, CI 1.20‐8.22, p=0.02). Patients undergoing SH were more likely to require an additional operative procedure compared to those who underwent CH (8 papers, 553 patients, OR 2.75, CI 1.31‐5.77, p=0.008). When all symptoms were considered, patients undergoing CH surgery were more likely to be asymptomatic (12 trials, 1097 patients, OR 0.59, CI 0.40‐0.88). Non significant trends in favor of SH were seen in pain, pruritis ani, and fecal urgency. All other clinical parameters showed trends favoring CH.