MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407738593 · doi:10.7759/cureus.79305

A Comparative Analysis of Gastrointestinal Recovery and Pain Management Outcomes in Stapled Versus Open Hemorrhoidectomy: A Meta-Analysis

2025· review· en· W4407738593 on OpenAlexaff
Sadaf Khalid, Zameer Hussain Laghari, Muhammad Kashif Rafiq, Ghashia Khan, Pavisankar Biju Seena, Saud Hussain, Fahmida Khatoon, Farook Ayyub Kantharia, S. Kantharia

Bibliographic record

VenueCureus · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnorectal Disease Treatments and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsGovernment of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMeta-analysisPain managementGeneral surgeryIntensive care medicineAnesthesiaInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stapled hemorrhoidectomy (SH) and open hemorrhoidectomy (OH) are widely used surgical techniques for managing hemorrhoidal disease. SH is often preferred for its potential benefits, such as reduced postoperative pain and faster recovery, while OH is traditionally employed in advanced or complex cases. However, the comparative impact of these techniques on gastrointestinal function and pain management remains unclear, necessitating further evaluation. This meta-analysis is aimed at comparing the clinical outcomes of SH and OH in patients with grade III and IV hemorrhoids, focusing on operative parameters, postoperative pain, recovery, complications, and recurrence. A systematic search was performed across PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, Scopus, ProQuest, and Google Scholar, using relevant keywords and Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms. Studies included were randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, and quasi-experimental studies published in English until July 2023, comparing gastrointestinal recovery and pain outcomes between SH and OH. The primary outcomes were gastrointestinal recovery, measured by time to resumption of normal diet and bowel movements, and pain management, assessed by postoperative pain scores. Secondary outcomes included hospital stay, complication rates, and recurrence. Data from eligible studies were pooled, and random-effects models were used to estimate the weighted mean differences and odds ratios (OR) for each outcome. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using Cochran's Q and I² tests. Seven studies involving 292 patients met the inclusion criteria. SH consistently demonstrated advantages over OH regarding pain management, gastrointestinal recovery, and hospital stay. SH patients reported significantly lower pain scores, reduced analgesic use by 35% on average, and faster recovery, with statistically significant results (p<0.05). SH patients also had a shorter time to the first bowel movement, with a reduced OR (OR=0.60, 95% CI: 0.38-0.98) compared to OH. Regarding complications, SH had lower incontinence rates (OR=0.48, 95% CI: 0.26-0.88), though a higher recurrence rate was noted in the SH group, especially at 12-18 months post-surgery. The risk of bias was generally low in most studies, with only a few showing moderate concerns. SH offers significant short-term benefits over OH, including reduced postoperative pain, faster recovery, and fewer complications. However, the higher recurrence rates in SH suggest that clinicians should carefully consider long-term outcomes when choosing the optimal surgical approach for hemorrhoidectomy.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.081

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0200.066
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.181
GPT teacher head0.449
Teacher spread0.267 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCureusSame topicAnorectal Disease Treatments and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207