Botulinum toxin injection for management of post-haemorrhoidectomy pain: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials.

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
R Quinn, G Jamsari, S Albayati
{"title":"Botulinum toxin injection for management of post-haemorrhoidectomy pain: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials.","authors":"R Quinn, G Jamsari, S Albayati","doi":"10.1007/s10151-025-03137-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Excisional haemorrhoidectomy remains the gold-standard treatment for grade III-IV haemorrhoids owing to the high success rate. However, post-operative pain management is an ongoing challenge. Botulinum toxin injection is thought to improve pain by targeting the internal anal sphincter spasm which occurs following haemorrhoidectomy. This systematic review and meta-analysis examines the effects of concurrent botulinum toxin injection on post-haemorrhoidectomy pain.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A search of MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Databases for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of botulinum toxin injection compared with placebo for management of post-haemorrhoidectomy pain was conducted following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Outcomes assessed included daily post-operative pain scores assessed using an analogue scale (0-10), pain at first defecation, analgesia use, complication rates and time to return to work.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of seven RCTs assessing 340 patients who underwent an excisional haemorrhoidectomy were included. In total, seven studies (n = 340) found significant reduction in pain post-procedure with botulinum toxin use on day 1 (mean difference, MD -1.53; 95% confidence intervals, CI -2.12, -0.94; p < 0.00001), with similar findings on day 2 and 4 (MD -1.84, 95% CI -3.28, -0.41; p = 0.01 and MD -1.63, 95% CI -2.15, -1.09; p < 0.00001, respectively). However, the analgesic effects were not seen on subsequent analyses up to day 14. Botulinum toxin was seen to be safe, with no significant difference in faecal incontinence (MD 1.05, 95% CI 0.40, 2.75; p = 0.93) or urinary retention (MD 0.37, 95% CI 0.09, 1.53; p = 0.17).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Botulinum toxin use for pain relief post-excisional haemorrhoidectomy is safe and effective in the initial peri-operative period; however, the results were short-lived. Further, more robust randomised controlled trials are needed to strengthen these findings and determine the utility of botulinum toxin in this setting.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>PROSPERO Register for Systematic Reviews Registration Number - CRD42024541351 on April 29 2024.</p>","PeriodicalId":51192,"journal":{"name":"Techniques in Coloproctology","volume":"29 1","pages":"96"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Techniques in Coloproctology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-025-03137-z","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Excisional haemorrhoidectomy remains the gold-standard treatment for grade III-IV haemorrhoids owing to the high success rate. However, post-operative pain management is an ongoing challenge. Botulinum toxin injection is thought to improve pain by targeting the internal anal sphincter spasm which occurs following haemorrhoidectomy. This systematic review and meta-analysis examines the effects of concurrent botulinum toxin injection on post-haemorrhoidectomy pain.

Methods: A search of MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Databases for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of botulinum toxin injection compared with placebo for management of post-haemorrhoidectomy pain was conducted following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Outcomes assessed included daily post-operative pain scores assessed using an analogue scale (0-10), pain at first defecation, analgesia use, complication rates and time to return to work.

Results: A total of seven RCTs assessing 340 patients who underwent an excisional haemorrhoidectomy were included. In total, seven studies (n = 340) found significant reduction in pain post-procedure with botulinum toxin use on day 1 (mean difference, MD -1.53; 95% confidence intervals, CI -2.12, -0.94; p < 0.00001), with similar findings on day 2 and 4 (MD -1.84, 95% CI -3.28, -0.41; p = 0.01 and MD -1.63, 95% CI -2.15, -1.09; p < 0.00001, respectively). However, the analgesic effects were not seen on subsequent analyses up to day 14. Botulinum toxin was seen to be safe, with no significant difference in faecal incontinence (MD 1.05, 95% CI 0.40, 2.75; p = 0.93) or urinary retention (MD 0.37, 95% CI 0.09, 1.53; p = 0.17).

Conclusions: Botulinum toxin use for pain relief post-excisional haemorrhoidectomy is safe and effective in the initial peri-operative period; however, the results were short-lived. Further, more robust randomised controlled trials are needed to strengthen these findings and determine the utility of botulinum toxin in this setting.

Trial registration: PROSPERO Register for Systematic Reviews Registration Number - CRD42024541351 on April 29 2024.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Techniques in Coloproctology
Techniques in Coloproctology GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY-SURGERY
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
9.10%
发文量
176
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Techniques in Coloproctology is an international journal fully devoted to diagnostic and operative procedures carried out in the management of colorectal diseases. Imaging, clinical physiology, laparoscopy, open abdominal surgery and proctoperineology are the main topics covered by the journal. Reviews, original articles, technical notes and short communications with many detailed illustrations render this publication indispensable for coloproctologists and related specialists. Both surgeons and gastroenterologists are represented on the distinguished Editorial Board, together with pathologists, radiologists and basic scientists from all over the world. The journal is strongly recommended to those who wish to be updated on recent developments in the field, and improve the standards of their work. Manuscripts submitted for publication must contain a statement to the effect that all human studies have been reviewed by the appropriate ethics committee and have therefore been performed in accordance with the ethical standards laid down in an appropriate version of the 1965 Declaration of Helsinki. It should also be stated clearly in the text that all persons gave their informed consent prior to their inclusion in the study. Details that might disclose the identity of the subjects under study should be omitted. Reports of animal experiments must state that the Principles of Laboratory Animal Care (NIH publication no. 86-23 revised 1985) were followed as were applicable national laws (e.g. the current version of the German Law on the Protection of Animals). The Editor-in-Chief reserves the right to reject manuscripts that do not comply with the above-mentioned requirements. Authors will be held responsible for false statements or for failure to fulfill such requirements.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信