| Autor: |
Liew, Amos Nepacina, Wang, Jason, Chen, Michelle Zhiyun, Tay, Yeng Kwang, Kong, Joseph C.H. |
| Předmět: |
|
| Zdroj: |
ANZ Journal of Surgery; Nov2024, Vol. 94 Issue 11, p2053-2061, 9p |
| Abstrakt: |
Background: Haemorrhoids remain a highly prevalent condition in Australia, affecting 39% of the adult Australian population. While haemorrhoidectomy remains the gold standard in the management of haemorrhoids, newer techniques such as haemorrhoid artery ligation‐recto anal repair (HAL‐RAR) are emerging as promising management modalities. We compare the efficacy of non‐Doppler guided (non‐DG) HAL‐RAR versus Doppler‐guided (DG) HAL‐RAR in the management of haemorrhoids. Methods: This study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022353806) and adhered to PRISMA 2020 guidelines. We conducted a systematic review using Medline, Embase and Cochrane database for comparative studies between Doppler‐guided HAL‐RAR and non‐Doppler‐guided HAL‐RAR in accordance with the PRISMA 2020 statement for reporting systematic reviews. Results: Five studies were included in our systematic review and meta‐analysis. There was no clinically significant difference in operative times (SMD 0.46, 9% CI −3.16 0 4.08, P = 0.804) or post‐operative bleeding (P = 0.142) between the two groups. DG HAL‐RAR patients were more likely to have post‐operative urinary retention (P < 0.001). Non‐DG patients were less likely to experience recurrence (OR 5.12, P < 0.001). Conclusion: Our review of non‐DG HAL‐RAR compared to DG HAL‐RAR reflects the non‐inferiority of the non‐DG HALRAR procedure. We hope that these results would provide a guide to clinicians performing HAL‐RAR, and would provide some cost savings for institutions who are unable to procure the necessary equipment for DG HAL‐RAR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Databáze: |
Complementary Index |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
Plný text