Prospective randomized comparative study of bipolar electrocoagulation versus heater probe for treatment of chronically bleeding internal hemorrhoids.

BACKGROUND: Our purpose was to compare the efficacy, complications, failure rates, and crossovers of heater and bipolar probe treatments of chronically bleeding internal hemorrhoids.

METHODS: Eighty-one patients (31 female, 50 male) with mean age of 53 years had large (grade 2 to 3) internal hemorrhoids with bleeding for a mean of 12 years, had failed medical management, and were randomized in a prospective study of anoscopic treatments to heater versus bipolar probes. Failure was defined as a major complication or failure to reduce the size of all internal hemorrhoids with three or more treatments.

RESULTS: With similar background variables and no difference in treatment times, rectal bleeding and other symptoms were controlled in a shorter time with the heater probe than with the bipolar probe (77 versus 121 days). Five complications (fissures, bleeding, or rectal spasm) occurred with the bipolar probe, and two occurred with the heater probe. The heater probe caused more pain during treatments but had significantly fewer failures and crossovers.

CONCLUSIONS: For patients who had failed medical management of chronically bleeding internal hemorrhoids, the techniques and complications of heater and bipolar probes were similar, but pain was more common, failures and crossovers were less frequent, and the time to symptom relief was shorter with the heater probe than with the bipolar probe.