![]() There were more recurrences after PPH.ĬONCLUSION: Compared with EH, PPH is associated with less postoperative pain, reduced operative time and hospital stay and earlier return to normal activity, and a trend towards improved patient satisfaction. There was no difference between the two procedures in terms of complications. There appears to be no significant difference in satisfaction with the procedure. A meta-analysis was performed using the random effects model on studies reporting 'mean' and SD or SEM.ĭATA SYNTHESIS: PPH was associated with less postoperative pain, less operative time, shorter hospital stay and earlier return to normal activities compared with EH. Secondary endpoints such as recurrence and complications were collated for descriptive analysis. STUDY SELECTION: RCTs comparing EH and PPH with >20 patients.ĭATA EXTRACTION: Primary endpoints were pain, operative time, hospital stay, satisfaction with procedure and time to return to normal activity. ![]() ![]() Articles addressing PPH and EH were included. OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of both procedures to treathaemorrhoids.ĭATA SOURCES: Literature review using MEDLINE. Department of Surgery, University of KwaZulu-Natal, DurbanīACKGROUND: The procedure for prolapse and haemorrhoids (PPH) was introduced to address the postoperative pain following excisional haemorrhoidectomy (EH). College of Health Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban Department of Surgery, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, and Colorectal Unit, Inkosi Albert Luthuli Central Hospital, Durban T E Madiba I T M Esterhuizen II S R Thomson III Procedure for prolapsed haemorrhoids versus excisional haemorrhoidectomy - a systematic review and meta-analysis
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |