PubMed · 13857636
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
1960. EXTERNAL hemorrhoids.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/13857636/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
Posterior Intravaginal Slingplasty and mesh augmented rectocele repairs are procedures promoted for correction of vaginal relaxation. There is little data on the complications of these procedures alone or in combination. The first report of rectovaginal fistula after Posterior Intravaginal Slingplasty with graft augmented rectocele repair is presented. A 60-year-old female developed a rectovaginal fistula 3 months after undergoing a Posterior Intravaginal Slingplasty and mesh augmented rectocele repair for prolapse. Two attempts at correcting the fistula failed and there was a recurrence of her vault prolapse. She may now require diverting colostomy and repeat repair of her vault prolapse. The case report highlights the difficulties in treating a rectovaginal fistula that developed after Posterior Intravaginal Slingplasty and mesh augmented rectocele repair for vaginal vault prolapse. More data regarding complications associated with use of these procedures is needed prior to widespread use.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
AIMS: The objective of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy outcomes of stapled hemorrhoidectomy (PPH) with Milligan-Morgan hemorrhoidectomy (MMH) in the treatment of severe hemorrhoids. METHODS: A meta-analysis pooled the effects of the safety and efficacy outcomes on PPH, and MMH in ten randomized control trials was presented using a fixed effects model or a random effects model (via RevMan Version 4.2). RESULTS: There was reasonably clear evidence in favor of PPH for operating time, length of hospital stay, pain, anal discharge, and patient satisfaction. However, skin tags and prolapse occurred at higher rates in the PPH group. PPH was not more superior than MMH as to postoperative bleeding, urinary retention, difficulty in defecating, anal fissure and stenosis, sphincter damage, resumption of normal activities, incontinence, pruritus, anal resting and squeeze pressures, and analgesia. CONCLUSIONS: PPH may be at least as safe as MMH. However, the efficacy of PPH compared with MMH could not be determined absolutely. More rigorous studies with longer follow-up periods and larger sample sizes need to be conducted.