Haemorrhoidectomy in outpatient practice.

Peter Labas, Bernard Ohradka, Marek Cambal, Juraj Olejnik, Juraj Fillo
{"title":"Haemorrhoidectomy in outpatient practice.","authors":"Peter Labas,&nbsp;Bernard Ohradka,&nbsp;Marek Cambal,&nbsp;Juraj Olejnik,&nbsp;Juraj Fillo","doi":"10.1080/11024150201680008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate our results of haemorrhoidectomy done as an outpatient procedure.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Retrospective study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>University hospital Bratislava, Slovak Republic.</p><p><strong>Subject: </strong>256 patients who required haemorrhoidectomy in 1996-2001.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>Milligan-Morgan haemorrhoidectomy under local (0.5% lignocaine with adrenaline 1:200,000, 100 ml) or epidural (0.5 bupivacaine, marcain, 20 ml; or 1% lignocaine, 20 ml).</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Mortality, morbidity, need for admission to hospital, and acceptability to patients.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No patient died. All patients were observed in the recovery room for 0.5-8 hours (mean 5 hours). 23 of the 256 patients (9%) developed minor complications including bleeding (n = 6), pain (n = 15), anal discharge (n = 1), and retention of urine (n = 1). 5 patients (2%) were admitted for pain or retention of urine. During the first 3 days after operation 29 patients required increased analgesia for discomfort. 223 patients (87%) were satisfied with outpatient treatment, while the remaining would have preferred to be admitted to hospital.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Day case haemorrhoidectomy is a safe and effective way of reducing costs without increasing morbidity, mortality, and is acceptable to most patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":22411,"journal":{"name":"The European journal of surgery = Acta chirurgica","volume":"168 11","pages":"619-20"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2002-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"18","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The European journal of surgery = Acta chirurgica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/11024150201680008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 18

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate our results of haemorrhoidectomy done as an outpatient procedure.

Design: Retrospective study.

Setting: University hospital Bratislava, Slovak Republic.

Subject: 256 patients who required haemorrhoidectomy in 1996-2001.

Interventions: Milligan-Morgan haemorrhoidectomy under local (0.5% lignocaine with adrenaline 1:200,000, 100 ml) or epidural (0.5 bupivacaine, marcain, 20 ml; or 1% lignocaine, 20 ml).

Main outcome measures: Mortality, morbidity, need for admission to hospital, and acceptability to patients.

Results: No patient died. All patients were observed in the recovery room for 0.5-8 hours (mean 5 hours). 23 of the 256 patients (9%) developed minor complications including bleeding (n = 6), pain (n = 15), anal discharge (n = 1), and retention of urine (n = 1). 5 patients (2%) were admitted for pain or retention of urine. During the first 3 days after operation 29 patients required increased analgesia for discomfort. 223 patients (87%) were satisfied with outpatient treatment, while the remaining would have preferred to be admitted to hospital.

Conclusion: Day case haemorrhoidectomy is a safe and effective way of reducing costs without increasing morbidity, mortality, and is acceptable to most patients.

痔疮切除术在门诊实践。
目的:评价痔切除术作为门诊手术的效果。设计:回顾性研究。单位:布拉迪斯拉发大学医院,斯洛伐克共和国。对象:1996-2001年间256例痔切除术患者。干预措施:局部(0.5%利多卡因伴肾上腺素1:20万,100 ml)或硬膜外(0.5%布比卡因,marcain, 20 ml;或1%的利多卡因,20毫升)。主要结局指标:死亡率、发病率、住院需求和患者可接受性。结果:无患者死亡。所有患者在康复室观察0.5 ~ 8小时(平均5小时)。256例患者中有23例(9%)出现轻微并发症,包括出血(n = 6)、疼痛(n = 15)、肛门分泌物(n = 1)和尿潴留(n = 1)。5例(2%)患者因疼痛或尿潴留入院。术后前3天,29例患者因不适需要增加镇痛。223例患者(87%)对门诊治疗满意,其余患者倾向于住院治疗。结论:日例痔切除术是一种安全有效的方法,可降低成本,不增加发病率和死亡率,大多数患者可接受。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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