Udesh Rajpurohit IIIrd Year Resident, Department of General Surgery, Sardar Patel Medical College & A.G. Hospital, Bikaner, Rajasthan, India
Dharamveer Jajra Associate Professor, Department of General Surgery, Sardar Patel Medical College & A.G. Hospital, Bikaner, Rajasthan, India
Shaheen Akbar IIIrd Year Resident, Department of General Surgery, Sardar Patel Medical College & A.G. Hospital, Bikaner, Rajasthan, India
Manohar L. Dawan Senior Professor and Unit Head Department of General Surgery, Sardar Patel Medical College & A.G. Hospital, Bikaner, Rajasthan, India
Sunder Kishore Assistant Professors, Department of General Surgery, Sardar Patel Medical College & A.G. Hospital, Bikaner, Rajasthan, India
Diwan Singh Jakhar Assistant Professors, Department of General Surgery, Sardar Patel Medical College & A.G. Hospital, Bikaner, Rajasthan, India
Address for correspondence: Udesh Rajpurohit, IIIrd Year Resident, Department of General Surgery, Sardar Patel Medical College & A.G. Hospital, Bikaner, Rajasthan, India E-mail: Udeshrajpurohit1996@gmail.com
This license
enables reusers to distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon the material in any
medium or format for noncommercial purposes only, and only so long as
attribution is given to the creator.
Udesh Rajpurohit, Dharamveer Jajra, Shaheen Akbar, et al. A Comparative Study Between Laser Hemorrhoidoplasty and Open Hemorrhoidectomy. New Indian J Surg. 2025; 17(2): 59-63.
Timeline
Received : April 24, 2026
Accepted : June 03, 2026
Published : June 30, 2026
Abstract
Introduction: Hemorrhoids are a common benign anorectal disorder that significantly impacts quality of life. While open hemorrhoidectomy (OH) is considered the gold standard for advanced hemorrhoids, it is associated with severe postoperative pain and prolonged recovery. Laser hemorrhoidoplasty (LHP) is a minimally invasive alternative that ablates hemorrhoidal tissue with laser energy, aiming to reduce morbidity. Aim: To compare the outcomes of LHP and OH in terms of operative time, postoperative pain, hospital stay, complications, and recurrence. Methods: This prospective comparative study was conducted over 12 months in the Department of Surgery. Patients with Grade ll-III–IV hemorrhoids were randomized into two groups: Laser Hemorrhoidoplasty Group (LHPG, n=30) and Open Hemorrhoidectomy Group (OHG, n=30). Data on operative time, pain (VAS score), hospital stay, complications, and recurrence were collected and analyzed using SPSS v26. Results: LHP demonstrated shorter operative time (25.6 ± 3.8 min vs. 38.7 ± 5.2 min), lower VAS pain scores at 12, 24, and 48 hours, and reduced hospital stay. Complication rates were lower in LHPG, with reduced bleeding and constipation compared to OHG. Recurrence rates at 3 months were comparable between the groups. Conclusion: Laser hemorrhoidoplasty is a safe, minimally invasive alternative to open hemorrhoidectomy, offering significant advantages in terms of pain reduction, faster recovery, and fewer complications, though cost and availability remain limiting factors.
References
1. Sun Z., Migaly J. Review of hemorrhoid disease: presentation and management. Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2016; 29(1): 22-29.
2. Riss S., Weiser F.A., Schwameis K., Riss T., Mittlböck M., Stift A. The prevalence of hemorrhoids in adults. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2012; 27(2): 215-220.
3. Lohsiriwat V. Hemorrhoids: from basic pathophysiology to clinical management. World J Gastroenterol. 2012; 18(17): 2009-2017.
4. Alonso-Coello P., Guyatt G., Heels-Ansdell D., Johanson J.F., Lopez-Yarto M., Mills E., Zhou Q., Johanson N.A. Laxatives for the treatment of hemorrhoids. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2005; (4): CD004649.
5. Johannsson H.O., Graf W., Påhlman L. Longterm results of haemorrhoidectomy. Eur J Surg. 2002; 168(9): 485-489.
6. Milligan E.T.C., Morgan C.N., Jones L.E., Officer R. Surgical anatomy of the anal canal, and the operative treatment of haemorrhoids. Lancet. 1937; 230(5959): 1119-1124.
8. Ho Y.H., Seow-Choen F., Goh H.S. Randomized trial of open and closed haemorrhoidectomy. Br J Surg. 1997; 84(12): 1729-1730.
9. Iyer V.S., Shrier I., Gordon P.H. Longterm outcome of rubber band ligation for symptomatic primary and recurrent internal hemorrhoids. Dis Colon Rectum. 2004; 47(8): 1364-1370.
10. Plapler H., Hage R., Duarte J., Cury J., Silva A., Silva C. Early results of the first Brazilian experience with laser for hemorrhoid treatment. Lasers Med Sci. 2009; 24(5): 729-733.
11. Giamundo P. Advantages and limits of hemorrhoidal dearterialization in the treatment of symptomatic hemorrhoids. World J Gastrointest Surg. 2016; 8(1): 1-4.
12. Maloku H., Gashi Z., Lazovic R., JunikuShkololli A. Laser hemorrhoidoplasty versus open hemorrhoidectomy: a randomized controlled trial. Med Arch. 2014; 68(5): 350-353.
13. Gupta P.J. Infrared coagulation versus rubber band ligation in early hemorrhoids. Braz J Med Biol Res. 2003; 36(10): 1433-1439.
14. Bittorf B., Stadelmaier U., Bittorf M., Hohenberger W., Matzel K.E. Surgical treatment of hemorrhoids: a critical appraisal of the current options. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2004; 389(1): 1-9.
15. Salfi R. Hemorrhoidectomy vs. minimally invasive techniques: A prospective, randomized trial. Colorectal Dis. 2010; 12(6): e120–e125.
16. De Nardi P., Capretti G., Corsaro A., Staudacher C. Stapled hemorrhoidopexy and laser hemorrhoidoplasty: long-term results and quality of life. Tech Coloproctol. 2016; 20(7): 443-449.
17. El Nakeeb A., Fikry A., Omar W., Fouda E., Youssef T. Conventional hemorrhoidectomy vs stapled hemorrhoidopexy vs laser hemorrhoidoplasty: randomized study. Int J Surg. 2010; 8(8): 670-675.
18. Giamundo P., Braini A., Calabrò G., Mistrangelo M., Mongardini M. The use of laser in hemorrhoidal disease: a systematic review. Tech Coloproctol. 2019; 23(9): 743-751.
Data Sharing Statement
There are no additional data available. All raw data and code are available upon request.
Funding
This research received no funding.
Author Contributions
All authors contributed significantly to the work and approve its publication.
Ethics Declaration
This article does not involve any human or animal subjects, and therefore does not require ethics approval.
Acknowledgements
We would like to express our gratitude to the patients, their families, and all those who have contributed to this study.
Conflicts of Interest
No conflicts of interest in this work.
About this article
Cite this article
Udesh Rajpurohit, Dharamveer Jajra, Shaheen Akbar, et al. A Comparative Study Between Laser Hemorrhoidoplasty and Open Hemorrhoidectomy. New Indian J Surg. 2025; 17(2): 59-63.
This license
enables reusers to distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon the material in any
medium or format for noncommercial purposes only, and only so long as
attribution is given to the creator.
This license
enables reusers to distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon the material in any
medium or format for noncommercial purposes only, and only so long as
attribution is given to the creator.
Description: Patient Demographics: Distribution of Laser Hemorrhoidoplasty group (LHPG) and Open Hemorrhoidectomy group (OHG) according to age
Heading
Description: Patient Demographics: Distribution of Laser Hemorrhoidoplasty group (LHPG) and Open Hemorrhoidectomy group (OHG) according to gender
Heading
Description: Operative Parameters: Distribution of open hemorrhoidectomy (OH) group and laser hemorrhoidoplasty (LHP) group according to their Days of Hospital Stay (DOHS) and Operative Time
Heading
Description: Post-operative Pain (VAS Scores): Distribution of open hemorrhoidectomy (OH) group and laser hemorroidoplasty(LHP) group according to VAS pain score
Heading
Description: post-operative Complications: Distribution of open hemorrhoidectomy (OH) group and laser hemorroidoplasty group according to their clinical feature
Heading
Description: Recurrence Rates: Distribution of open hemorrhoidectomy (OH) group and laser hemorroidoplasty (LHP) group according to their recurrence rates