ClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT03298997Updated Oct 12, 2020

Ligation and Hemorrhoidopexy Technique Versus Ligation of Hemorrhoidal Arteries Using Ultrasound for Hemorrhoids

An interventional study of Ligation and Hemorrhoidopexy and Ultrasound Guided Ligation of Hemorrhoidal Arteries in Hemorrhoids, sponsored by Larissa University Hospital. Completed at 1 site in Greece. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 80 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2020-10-12.

Sponsored by Larissa University Hospital · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
60
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years to 80 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The purpose of this study is to compare two techniques for treating hemorrhoids, the ligation and hemorrhoidopexy technique and the conventional ligation of hemorrhoidal arteries using ultrasound, in patients with non-complicated hemorrhoids.

Read the detailed description

Surgical operations for the treatment of perianal diseases are a major part of all elective surgical cases. The reduction in the hospitalization time of patients undergoing surgical procedures for benign perianal diseases is to the benefit of both the patient and healthcare provider. The importance of 'one day' surgical operations lies in the fact that the patient returns directly to his social and working environment, while the number of occupied hospital beds and the total hospitalization costs are reduced. A typical example is the goal set by National Health Service (NHS), where the 75% of the scheduled operations should consist of 'one day' operations. In order to achieve this goal, several obstacles should be dealt with, including the implementation of more efficient and safe surgical techniques. Therefore, this would be associated with a decrease in the operation time, early recovery and faster hospital discharge.

Hemorrhoids is one of the most common benign perianal diseases. According to a recent prospective study of 976 patients, 38.93% of them suffered from hemorrhoids, with 8.16% and 0.53% being Grade III and IV, according to Goligher classification, respectively. The percentage of the symptomatic patients was, also, significant (44.74%). Symptomatic hemorrhoids, include bleeding, pruritus, pain, poor hygiene and the presence of palpable hemorrhoid nodules.

As far as the blood supply of the rectum and the broader anatomic region is concerned, it is provided by the superior, middle and inferior hemorrhoidal arteries. The superior hemorrhoidal artery is a branch of the inferior mesenteric artery and is carried behind the rectum, where it provides branches up to the internal sphincter muscle. The right and left middle hemorrhoidal artery originate from the respective internal iliac artery and their branches are cross-linked with the respective branches deriving from the superior hemorrhoidal artery. Finally, inferior hemorrhoidal arteries derive from the respective internal pudendal arteries. Correspondingly, hemorrhoidal venous plexus consists of the middle and inferior hemorrhoidal veins, which through the internal iliac veins drain into the inferior cava vein. Hemorrhoidal tissue constitutes a continence mechanism of the upper rectum and consists of vascular tissue, connective tissue and smooth muscle fibers, within the rectal canal. Through the approximation of the hemorrhoidal tissue, closure of the anal canal and protection of the sphincter mechanism is achieved. Since modern pathogenesis theories of hemorrhoidal disease attribute to the increased arterial flow in the hemorrhoidal plexus the generating cause of this disease, recent anatomical studies mapped the vascular network, indicating that the arteries are not confined to the anatomical regions described in the literature.

According to recent guidelines, the modification of dietary intake, through the increase of fluid and fiber intake, consists the first line treatment of symptomatic hemorrhoidal disease. However, in Grade III-IV hemorrhoidal disease or in Grade II, where conservative therapy failed, surgical intervention is required. Surgeon has plenty of techniques at his disposal, in order to treat hemorrhoids. Examples of these techniques are operations, such as hemorrhoidectomy (open, closed, Milligan-Morgan, Parks, using staplers, using energy sources, e.g. Harmonic, Ligasure, Laser, bipolar forceps), elastic rings ligation, sclerotherapy and Hemorrhoidal Arteries Ligation (ΗΑL) or Transanal Hemorrhoidal Dearterialization (THD).

Ligation of hemorrhoidal arteries using a Doppler apparatus, is a minimally invasive technique that was first applied by Morinaga et al. in 1995 and has as principle the elective ligation of the arteries that supply the hemorrhoidal plexus. In a recent meta-analysis, the superiority of HAL in areas such as, postoperative bleeding, emergency reoperation, operative duration, length of hospital stay and postoperative pain, was shown. A major drawback of this technique, however, remains the high rate of recurrence, which ranges from 11.1% to 59.3%, for Grade IV hemorrhoids.

Despite the comparative advantages of this minimally invasive technique, the high cost of the necessary equipment and the respective consumables, is a barrier to its broad application. Gupta et al. in a prospective randomized study, compared Doppler-Guided HAL (DG-HAL) to hemorrhoid artery ligation and hemorrhoidopexy. Ligation was performed on the hemorrhoid nodule at the 3rd, 7th and 11th hours, followed by continuous hemorrhoidal nodule ligation and hemorrhoidopexy. The DG-HAL group had a significantly longer operative time (31 min vs 9 min) and post-operative pain (4.4 vs 2.2), without any differences in complication or recurrence rates. Similarly, Huang et al., reported a respective ligation technique, where, through the use of the index finger, the artery was palpated, followed by repeating compression and ligation cycles, in order to fix the affected hemorrhoids above the dental line. In this group, operative time was longer when compared to the DG-HAL group (35.57 vs. 12.73). There was no difference in terms of postoperative improvement of symptoms and hospitalization duration. In the experimental group, however, the cost of hospitalization and the relapse rate was significantly lower. Finally, Aigner et al., in a recent randomized study, investigated the efficacy of hemorrhoidopexy for Grade III hemorrhoids. They concluded that the techniques of hemorrhoidopexy are effective and the addition of DG-HAL does not affect the results.

Given these facts, the present trial was designed, in order to compare the two techniques for hemorrhoidal disease treatment, the ligation and hemorrhoidopexy technique and the conventional ligation of hemorrhoid arteries using ultrasound.

02

Conditions studied

  • Hemorrhoids

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • Hemorrhoids
  • Ligation
  • Ultrasound
  • Prospective
  • Randomized Controlled Trial
03

In context

Hemorrhoids

238 studies on the registry are indexed under Hemorrhoids; 73 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 60 is below the median of 100 across 183 interventional studies indexed under Hemorrhoids.

Browse Hemorrhoids studies →

Lead sponsor

Larissa University Hospital is the lead sponsor of 41 studies on the registry; 7 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 80 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • Μale or female
  • Age: 18 to 80 years
  • (ASA) score: I and II
  • Grade I, II, and III hemorrhoids

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Acute perianal diseases, such as perianal abscesses, complicated hemorrhoids (e.g., thrombosis) and acute anal fissure
  • Malignant perianal disorders
  • Patient age ≥ 80 years
  • ≥ ΙΙΙ
  • Presence of inflammatory bowel disease
  • History of a previous rectoanal operation
  • Presence of a cardiovascular, respiratory, renal, hepatic or metabolic disorder. Furthermore, diseases, such as obesity, psychiatric disorders or gastrointestinal disorders constitute exclusion criteria
Terms in these criteria, in plain language(2)

Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.

ASA physical status

The anaesthetists’ scale of health before surgery: I is healthy, II has a mild illness that is under control, III a severe one, IV a severe illness that is a constant threat to life. V and VI are used for the critically ill and for organ donors.

Clinically significant

Judged by the study doctor to matter for your health or for the study. It is a doctor’s decision, so ask the study team if you are unsure whether something counts.

05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Triple (Participant, Investigator, Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
60 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Ligation and Hemorrhoidopexy

    The patient will be placed in the Lloyd-Davies position. Provision of a sterile field, using a 10% povidone iodine solution. Rectal dilatation will be performed with a 10% xylocaine gel. Introduction of a proctoscope. Identification of the hemorrhoidal nodules (3rd, 7th, 11th hour). Confirmation of the hemorrhoidal artery location, through palpation. Ligation of the hemorrhoidal nodules using an absorbable polyglycolic acid suture (2-0, 5/8 inch needle). Placement of a fixative suture in the hemorrhoidal nodule and then performance of hemorrhoidopexy Placement of a hemostatic gauze in the surgical field. Prior to operation, the patients will be submitted to pudendal nerve block. Using an atraumatic 25 Gauge (G) needle, a 20ml lidocaine solution (diluted with saline in a 1:1 rate) will be administered bilaterally, medially to the ischial tuberosity. 10 minutes before the operation, the patient will receive 1-2.5mg midazolam and 0.1-0.2 mg fentanyl.

    Procedure: Ligation and Hemorrhoidopexy

  • Active comparator
    Ultrasound Guided Ligation of Hemorrhoidal Arteries

    The patient will be placed in the Lloyd-Davies position. Provision of a sterile field, using a 10% povidone iodine solution. Rectal dilatation will be performed with a 10% xylocaine gel. Use of a proctoscope combined with a Doppler sensor. After the hemorrhoidal artery localization, Z ligations will be placed, using an absorbable polyglycolic acid suture (2-0, 5/8 inch needle). The proper artery ligation will be confirmed by the absence of the Doppler signal. In the presence of residual hemorrhoidal tissue hemorrhoidopexy will be performed, by applying a continuous suture. Placement of a hemostatic gauze in the surgical field. Prior to operation, the patients will be submitted to spinal anesthesia. Using an atraumatic 25 Gauge (G) needle, a levobupivacaine 5mg/ml and fentanyl 25mg solution, will be administered at the height of lumbar (L)2-L3 or L3-L4.

    Procedure: Ultrasound Guided Ligation of Hemorrhoidal Arteries

Interventions

  • ProcedureLigation and Hemorrhoidopexy

    Identification through palpation and ligation of the hemorrhoidal nodules (3rd, 7th, 11th hour), using an absorbable polyglycolic acid suture (2-0, 5/8 inch needle). Prior to operation, the patients will be submitted to pudendal nerve block.

  • ProcedureUltrasound Guided Ligation of Hemorrhoidal Arteries

    Ultrasound guided identification and ligation of the hemorrhoidal arteries, using an absorbable polyglycolic acid suture (2-0, 5/8 inch needle). Prior to operation, the patients will be submitted to spinal anesthesia.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Symptoms Remission Rate

    The primary endpoint of the present study, is the identification of difference in the symptoms remission rate, within one month postoperatively, between the ligation and hemorrhoidopexy technique and the conventional ligation of hemorrhoidal arteries using ultrasound, in patients with non-complicated hemorrhoidal disease. If the symptoms are treated then it will be defined as=1 'YES' If the symptoms are not treated then it will be defined as=0 'NO'

    Time frame: 1 month postoperatively

Secondary outcomes

  1. Operative time

    The total operative time will be recorded. Measurement unit: minutes

    Time frame: Intraoperative period

  2. Postoperative mobilization time

    The postoperative mobilization time of the patient will be recorded. Measurement unit: hours

    Time frame: Maximum time frame 24 hours postoperatively

  3. Onset of oral feeding

    The time that the patient started oral feeding will be recorded. Measurement unit: hours

    Time frame: Maximum time frame 24 hours postoperatively

  4. Postoperative pain level at 12 hours

    Postoperative pain level at 12 hours after surgery, quantified with the use of the Visual analogue scale (VAS) scale.

    Time frame: 12 hours postoperatively

  5. Hypotension

    Occurrence of postoperative hypotension. If such an episode occurs, then it will be defined as=1 'YES' If such an episode does not occur, then it will be defined as=0 'NO'

    Time frame: Maximum time frame 24 hours postoperatively

  6. Nausea

    Occurrence of postoperative nausea. If such an episode occurs, then it will be defined as=1 'YES' If such an episode does not occur, then it will be defined as=0 'NO'

    Time frame: Maximum time frame 24 hours postoperatively

  7. Vomiting

    Occurrence of postoperative vomiting. If such an episode occurs, then it will be defined as=1 'YES' If such an episode does not occur, then it will be defined as=0 'NO'

    Time frame: Maximum time frame 24 hours postoperatively

  8. Headache

    Occurrence of postoperative headache. If such an episode occurs, then it will be defined as=1 'YES' If such an episode does not occur, then it will be defined as=0 'NO'

    Time frame: Maximum time frame 24 hours postoperatively

  9. Urinary retention

    Occurrence of postoperative urinary retention. If such an episode occurs, then it will be defined as=1 'YES' If such an episode does not occur, then it will be defined as=0 'NO'

    Time frame: Maximum time frame 24 hours postoperatively

  10. Bleeding at the operative site

    Occurrence of postoperative bleeding at the operative site. If such an episode occurs, then it will be defined as=1 'YES' If such an episode does not occur, then it will be defined as=0 'NO'

    Time frame: Maximum time frame 24 hours postoperatively

  11. Postoperative discharge time

    Postoperative time that the patient can be safely discharged. Measurement unit: hours. The patient will be discharged, when it is ensured that is medically safe to be released. In particular, as the exit time of the patient, will be regarded the time that the patient will fulfill the Clinical Discharge Criteria. More specifically, the patient should meet the following : steady vital signs, be oriented, without nausea or vomiting, mobilized with a steady gait, without a significant bleeding.

    Time frame: Maximum time frame 48 hours postoperatively

  12. Postoperative pain level at 7 days

    Postoperative pain level at 7 days after surgery, quantified with the use of the VAS scale.

    Time frame: 7 days postoperatively

  13. Oedema at the operative site

    Occurrence of postoperative oedema at the operative site. If such an episode occurs, then it will be defined as=1 'YES' If such an episode does not occur, then it will be defined as=0 'NO'

    Time frame: 7 days postoperatively

  14. Hematoma at the operative site

    Occurrence of postoperative hematoma at the operative site. If such an episode occurs, then it will be defined as=1 'YES' If such an episode does not occur, then it will be defined as=0 'NO'

    Time frame: 7 days postoperatively

  15. Infection at the operative site

    Occurrence of postoperative infection at the operative site. If such an episode occurs, then it will be defined as=1 'YES' If such an episode does not occur, then it will be defined as=0 'NO'

    Time frame: 7 days postoperatively

  16. Stenosis at the operative site

    Occurrence of postoperative stenosis at the operative site. If such an episode occurs, then it will be defined as=1 'YES' If such an episode does not occur, then it will be defined as=0 'NO'

    Time frame: 7 days postoperatively

  17. Postoperative return to work time

    The time that the patient resumed his work or normal activities will be recorded. Measurement unit: days

    Time frame: Postoperative period up to 1 month

  18. Pruritus

    Occurrence of postoperative pruritus at the operative site. If such an episode occurs, then it will be defined as=1 'YES' If such an episode does not occur, then it will be defined as=0 'NO'

    Time frame: 1 year postoperatively

  19. Mucosal proptosis

    Occurrence of postoperative mucosal proptosis at the operative site. If such an episode occurs, then it will be defined as=1 'YES' If such an episode does not occur, then it will be defined as=0 'NO'

    Time frame: 1 year postoperatively

  20. Perianal nodules

    Occurrence of postoperative perianal nodules. If such an episode occurs, then it will be defined as=1 'YES' If such an episode does not occur, then it will be defined as=0 'NO'

    Time frame: 1 year postoperatively

  21. Constipation

    Occurrence of postoperative constipation. If such an episode occurs, then it will be defined as=1 'YES' If such an episode does not occur, then it will be defined as=0 'NO'

    Time frame: 1 year postoperatively

  22. Tenesmus

    Occurrence of tenesmus. If such an episode occurs, then it will be defined as=1 'YES' If such an episode does not occur, then it will be defined as=0 'NO'

    Time frame: 1 year postoperatively

  23. Reoperation

    Occurrence of reoperation. If the patient is reoperated, then it will be defined as=1 'YES' If the patient is not reoperated, then it will be defined as=0 'NO'

    Time frame: 1 year postoperatively

  24. Disease recurrence rate

    Disease recurrence rate If such an episode occurs, then it will be defined as=1 'YES' If such an episode does not occur, then it will be defined as=0 'NO'

    Time frame: 1 year postoperatively

  25. Satisfaction level

    Satisfaction level measured at a 0-10 scale

    Time frame: 1 year postoperatively

  26. Difference in the quality of life of the patient

    Difference in the quality of life of the patient, at 1 month and 1 year postoperatively, compared to the respective preoperative measurements, based on the Short Form 36 (SF-36) questionnaire, weighted for the Greek population.

    Time frame: Preoperatively, 1 month postoperatively and 1 year postoperatively

07

Study locations

1 site
  • Department of Surgery, University Hospital of Larissa
    Lárisa, Larissa 41110, Greece
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Faiz OD, Brown TJ, Colucci G, Grover M, Clark SK. Trends in colorectal day case surgery in NHS Trusts between 1998 and 2005. Colorectal Dis. 2008 Nov;10(9):935-42. doi: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2008.01481.x. Epub 2008 Feb 21. PubMed 18294271 ↗
  • Riss S, Weiser FA, Schwameis K, Riss T, Mittlbock M, Steiner G, Stift A. The prevalence of hemorrhoids in adults. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2012 Feb;27(2):215-20. doi: 10.1007/s00384-011-1316-3. Epub 2011 Sep 20. PubMed 21932016 ↗
  • Schuurman JP, Go PM, Bleys RL. Anatomical branches of the superior rectal artery in the distal rectum. Colorectal Dis. 2009 Nov;11(9):967-71. doi: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2008.01729.x. Epub 2008 Oct 31. PubMed 19175645 ↗
  • Rivadeneira DE, Steele SR, Ternent C, Chalasani S, Buie WD, Rafferty JL; Standards Practice Task Force of The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons. Practice parameters for the management of hemorrhoids (revised 2010). Dis Colon Rectum. 2011 Sep;54(9):1059-64. doi: 10.1097/DCR.0b013e318225513d. No abstract available. PubMed 21825884 ↗
  • Ho YH, Seow-Choen F, Tan M, Leong AF. Randomized controlled trial of open and closed haemorrhoidectomy. Br J Surg. 1997 Dec;84(12):1729-30. PubMed 9448627 ↗
  • Hosch SB, Knoefel WT, Pichlmeier U, Schulze V, Busch C, Gawad KA, Broelsch CE, Izbicki JR. Surgical treatment of piles: prospective, randomized study of Parks vs. Milligan-Morgan hemorrhoidectomy. Dis Colon Rectum. 1998 Feb;41(2):159-64. doi: 10.1007/BF02238242. PubMed 9556238 ↗
  • Senagore AJ, Singer M, Abcarian H, Fleshman J, Corman M, Wexner S, Nivatvongs S; Procedure for Prolapse and Hemmorrhoids (PPH) Multicenter Study Group. A prospective, randomized, controlled multicenter trial comparing stapled hemorrhoidopexy and Ferguson hemorrhoidectomy: perioperative and one-year results. Dis Colon Rectum. 2004 Nov;47(11):1824-36. doi: 10.1007/s10350-004-0694-9. Erratum In: Dis Colon Rectum. 2005 Feb;48(2):400. Dis Colon Rectum. 2005 May;48(5):1099. PubMed 15622574 ↗
  • Chung CC, Cheung HY, Chan ES, Kwok SY, Li MK. Stapled hemorrhoidopexy vs. Harmonic Scalpel hemorrhoidectomy: a randomized trial. Dis Colon Rectum. 2005 Jun;48(6):1213-9. doi: 10.1007/s10350-004-0918-z. PubMed 15793648 ↗
  • Lawes DA, Palazzo FF, Francis DL, Clifton MA. One year follow up of a randomized trial comparing Ligasure with open haemorrhoidectomy. Colorectal Dis. 2004 Jul;6(4):233-5. doi: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2004.00608.x. PubMed 15206964 ↗
  • Pandini LC, Nahas SC, Nahas CS, Marques CF, Sobrado CW, Kiss DR. Surgical treatment of haemorrhoidal disease with CO2 laser and Milligan-Morgan cold scalpel technique. Colorectal Dis. 2006 Sep;8(7):592-5. doi: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2006.01023.x. PubMed 16919112 ↗
  • Chung CC, Ha JP, Tai YP, Tsang WW, Li MK. Double-blind, randomized trial comparing Harmonic Scalpel hemorrhoidectomy, bipolar scissors hemorrhoidectomy, and scissors excision: ligation technique. Dis Colon Rectum. 2002 Jun;45(6):789-94. doi: 10.1007/s10350-004-6299-5. PubMed 12072632 ↗
  • Shanmugam V, Thaha MA, Rabindranath KS, Campbell KL, Steele RJ, Loudon MA. Systematic review of randomized trials comparing rubber band ligation with excisional haemorrhoidectomy. Br J Surg. 2005 Dec;92(12):1481-7. doi: 10.1002/bjs.5185. PubMed 16252313 ↗
  • Khoury GA, Lake SP, Lewis MC, Lewis AA. A randomized trial to compare single with multiple phenol injection treatment for haemorrhoids. Br J Surg. 1985 Sep;72(9):741-2. doi: 10.1002/bjs.1800720924. PubMed 3899248 ↗
  • Ratto C, Donisi L, Parello A, Litta F, Doglietto GB. Evaluation of transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization as a minimally invasive therapeutic approach to hemorrhoids. Dis Colon Rectum. 2010 May;53(5):803-11. doi: 10.1007/DCR.0b013e3181cdafa7. PubMed 20389215 ↗
  • Morinaga K, Hasuda K, Ikeda T. A novel therapy for internal hemorrhoids: ligation of the hemorrhoidal artery with a newly devised instrument (Moricorn) in conjunction with a Doppler flowmeter. Am J Gastroenterol. 1995 Apr;90(4):610-3. PubMed 7717320 ↗
  • Simillis C, Thoukididou SN, Slesser AA, Rasheed S, Tan E, Tekkis PP. Systematic review and network meta-analysis comparing clinical outcomes and effectiveness of surgical treatments for haemorrhoids. Br J Surg. 2015 Dec;102(13):1603-18. doi: 10.1002/bjs.9913. Epub 2015 Sep 30. PubMed 26420725 ↗
  • Giordano P, Overton J, Madeddu F, Zaman S, Gravante G. Transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization: a systematic review. Dis Colon Rectum. 2009 Sep;52(9):1665-71. doi: 10.1007/DCR.0b013e3181af50f4. PubMed 19690499 ↗
  • Gupta PJ, Kalaskar S, Taori S, Heda PS. Doppler-guided hemorrhoidal artery ligation does not offer any advantage over suture ligation of grade 3 symptomatic hemorrhoids. Tech Coloproctol. 2011 Dec;15(4):439-44. doi: 10.1007/s10151-011-0780-7. Epub 2011 Oct 28. PubMed 22033542 ↗
  • Gupta PJ, Kalaskar S. Ligation and mucopexy for prolapsing hemorrhoids--a ten year experience. Ann Surg Innov Res. 2008 Nov 28;2:5. doi: 10.1186/1750-1164-2-5. PubMed 19038061 ↗
  • Huang HX, Yao YB, Tang Y. Application of 'tying, binding and fixing operation' in surgical treatment of severe mixed hemorrhoids. Exp Ther Med. 2016 Aug;12(2):1022-1028. doi: 10.3892/etm.2016.3339. Epub 2016 May 12. PubMed 27446315 ↗
  • Aigner F, Kronberger I, Oberwalder M, Loizides A, Ulmer H, Gruber L, Pratschke J, Peer S, Gruber H. Doppler-guided haemorrhoidal artery ligation with suture mucopexy compared with suture mucopexy alone for the treatment of Grade III haemorrhoids: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Colorectal Dis. 2016 Jul;18(7):710-6. doi: 10.1111/codi.13280. PubMed 26787597 ↗
  • Spyridakis M, Christodoulidis G, Symeonidis D, Dimas D, Diamantis A, Polychronopoulou E, Tepetes K. Outcomes of Doppler-guided hemorrhoid artery ligation: analysis of 90 consecutive patients. Tech Coloproctol. 2011 Oct;15 Suppl 1:S21-4. doi: 10.1007/s10151-011-0727-z. PubMed 21887577 ↗
  • Tepetes K, Symeonidis D, Christodoulidis G, Spyridakis M, Hatzitheofilou K. Pudendal nerve block versus local anesthesia for harmonic scalpel hemorrhoidectomy: a prospective randomized study. Tech Coloproctol. 2010 Nov;14 Suppl 1:S1-3. doi: 10.1007/s10151-010-0614-z. PubMed 20683750 ↗
  • Honca M, Dereli N, Kose EA, Honca T, Kutuk S, Unal SS, Horasanli E. Low-dose levobupivacaine plus fentanyl combination for spinal anesthesia in anorectal surgery. Braz J Anesthesiol. 2015 Nov-Dec;65(6):461-5. doi: 10.1016/j.bjane.2014.01.007. Epub 2014 Feb 20. PubMed 26614142 ↗
  • Alkhaldi HM, Salaita WM, Shabaneh MA, Al-Horut MI, Aldabbas RM, Uraiqat AA. Postoperative Outcome Comparison Between Pudendal Nerve Block and Caudal Block After Lateral Open Internal Sphincterotomy. Med Arch. 2015 Jun;69(3):187-9. doi: 10.5455/medarh.2015.69.187-189. Epub 2015 Jun 10. PubMed 26261389 ↗
  • Pappa E, Kontodimopoulos N, Niakas D. Validating and norming of the Greek SF-36 Health Survey. Qual Life Res. 2005 Jun;14(5):1433-8. doi: 10.1007/s11136-004-6014-y. PubMed 16047519 ↗
  • Flight L, Julious SA. Practical guide to sample size calculations: non-inferiority and equivalence trials. Pharm Stat. 2016 Jan-Feb;15(1):80-9. doi: 10.1002/pst.1716. Epub 2015 Nov 25. PubMed 26604186 ↗
  • Chung F, Chan VW, Ong D. A post-anesthetic discharge scoring system for home readiness after ambulatory surgery. J Clin Anesth. 1995 Sep;7(6):500-6. doi: 10.1016/0952-8180(95)00130-a. PubMed 8534468 ↗
  • Perivoliotis K, Spyridakis M, Zintzaras E, Arnaoutoglou E, Pramateftakis MG, Tepetes K. An enhanced outpatient modality for the treatment of hemorrhoidal disease: preliminary results. G Chir. 2019 Mar-Apr;40(2):153-157. PubMed 31131818 ↗
  • Perivoliotis K, Spyridakis M, Zintzaras E, Arnaoutoglou E, Pramateftakis MG, Tepetes K. Non-Doppler hemorrhoidal artery ligation and hemorrhoidopexy combined with pudendal nerve block for the treatment of hemorrhoidal disease: a non-inferiority randomized controlled trial. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2021 Feb;36(2):353-363. doi: 10.1007/s00384-020-03768-8. Epub 2020 Oct 6. PubMed 33025104 ↗

Study documents

PDFs hosted by the registry, ClinicalTrials.gov.

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Oct 12, 2020, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT03298997
Lead sponsor
Larissa University Hospital
Responsible party
Perivoliotis Konstantinos (Perivoliotis Konstantinos MD, MSc Principal Investigator, Larissa University Hospital) — Principal investigator
First posted
Oct 2, 2017
Start date
Oct 1, 2017
Primary completion
Apr 15, 2020
Completion
Jul 15, 2020
Last update
Oct 12, 2020

Study contacts

Konstantinos Tepetes, Professor
study director · Department of Surgery, University Hospital of Larissa

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Oct 2020. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion