COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS AND OUR EXPERIENCE IN TREATMENT OF PATIENTS WITH CHRONIC HEMORRHOID A BASE FOR EVIDENTIAL MEDICINE
Summary. Aim. Decrease the amount of postoperative complications and improve quality of life for patients by a chronic hemorrhoid (CH).
Materials and methods. Both international and national foreign clinical protocols are analysed. The obtained data are confronted with our clinical experience.
Results and their discussion. Materials and methods. In the looks of foreign colleagues to tactics of treatment of patients with CH are analysed. The obtained data are confronted from positions of the best medical practice of providing of medicaid to the patients with a CH. Results and their discussion. In spite of insignificant differences in the volume of operative treatment of patients of CH, international practice adheres to single approach on tactics of surgical decision of this problem. Among the radical methods of treatment recommend next methodologies as an operation of choice: hemorrhoidectomy Milligan - Morgan, Ferguson and Parks, that in all researches were marked as high-efficiency. Clinical experience of our clinic, that Milligan–Morgan hemorrhoidectomy is the operation of choice for patients with 3-4 degrees of fall of knots, and applications of modern methodologies allows to bring down lacks of this operation and to attain the level of complications less than 1 %.
Conclusions. The necessity of development of compatible clinical protocol of medicare to the patients takes place with CH. Introduction of single home standards of providing of medicare to the patients with CH will allow to bring down the risk of development of complications and improve the results of treatment. The got results of own researches on providing of medicare to the patients with CH are comparable with the results of foreign colleagues.
2. Саволюк С. І., Ігнатов І. М., Шуляренко О. В. та ін. Порівняльний аналіз степлерної гемороїдектомії та трансанальної гемороїдальної деартеризації. Хірургія України. 2017. – 3(63). – С. 78-83.
3. Agarwal N, Singh K, Sheikh P, Mittal K, Mathai V, Kumar A. Executive Summary - The Association of Colon & Rectal Surgeons of India (ACRSI) Practice Guidelines for the Management of Haemorrhoids-2016. Indian J Surg. 2017;79:58–61. doi: 10.1007/s12262-016-1578-7.
4. Altomare DF, Roveran A, Pecorella G, Gaj F, Stortini E. The treatment of hemorrhoids: guidelines of the Italian Society of Colorectal Surgery. Tech Coloproctol. 2006;10:181–186. doi: 10.1007/s10151-006-0277-y.
5. Clinical Practice Committee, American Gastroenterological Association. American Gastroenterological Association medical position statement: Diagnosis and treatment of hemorrhoids. Gastroenterology. 2004;126:1461–1462.
6. Davis BR, Lee-Kong SA, Migaly J, Feingold DL, Steele SR. The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Management of Hemorrhoids. Dis Colon Rectum. 2018;61:284–292. doi: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000001030.
7. IOM (Institut of Medicine) (2011) Clinical Practice Guidelines We Can Trust. Washington, DC: The Nationale Academies Press. www.iom.edu (Chapter 5. Current Best Practices and Proposed Standards for Development of Trustworthy CPGs: Part II, Traversing the Process).
8. Ozer MT, Yigit T, Uzar AI, et al.: A comparison of different hemorrhoidectomy procedures. Saudi Med J 2008; 29(9): 1264–9.
9. Tan K, Zin T, Sim H, Poon, P, Cheng, A, Mak, K: Randomized clinical trial comparing LigaSure haemorrhoidectomy with open diathermy haemorrhoidectomy. Tech Coloproctol 2008; 12(2): 93–7.
10. Wald A, Bharucha AE, Cosman BC, Whitehead WE. ACG clinical guideline: management of benign anorectal disorders. Am J Gastroenterol. 2014;109:1141–57; (Quiz) 1058. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2014.190.