|| Checking for direct PDF access through Ovid
The purpose of this systematic review was to compare the long-term results of stapled hemorrhoidopexy with conventional excisional hemorrhoidectomy in patients with internal hemorrhoids.A systematic review of all randomized, controlled trials comparing stapled hemorrhoidopexy and conventional hemorrhoidectomy with long-term results was performed by using the Cochrane methodology. The minimum follow-up was six months. Primary outcomes were hemorrhoid recurrence, hemorrhoid symptom recurrence, complications, and pain.Twelve trials were included. Follow-up varied from six months to four years. Conventional hemorrhoidectomy was more effective in preventing long-term recurrence of hemorrhoids (odds ratio (OR), 3.85; 95 percent confidence interval (CI), 1.47-10.07;P< 0.006). Conventional hemorrhoidectomy also prevents hemorrhoids in studies with follow-up of one year or more (OR, 3.6; 95 percent CI, 1.24-10.49;P< 0.02). Conventional hemorrhoidectomy is superior in preventing the symptom of prolapse (OR, 2.96; 95 percent CI, 1.33-6.58;P< 0.008). Conventional hemorrhoidectomy also is more effective at preventing prolapse in studies with follow-up of one year or more (OR, 2.68; 95 percent CI, 0.98-7.34;P< 0.05). Nonsignificant trends in favor of conventional hemorrhoidectomy were seen in the proportion of asymptomatic patients, bleeding, soiling/difficultly with hygiene/incontinence, the presence of perianal skin tags, and the need for further surgery. Nonsignificant trends in favor of stapled hemorrhoidopexy were seen in pain, pruritus ani, and symptoms of anal obstruction/stenosis.Conventional hemorrhoidectomy is superior to stapled hemorrhoidopexy for prevention of postoperative recurrence of internal hemorrhoids. Fewer patients who received conventional hemorrhoidectomy complained of hemorrhoidal prolapse in long-term follow-up compared with stapled hemorrhoidopexy.