Comparison between radiofrequency scalpel, electrocautery, and CO2 laser in conventional hemorrhoidectomy in patients with grade IV hemorrhoidal disease: a randomized clinical trial

Status

Recruiting

Phases

Unknown

Study type

Interventional

Source

REBEC

Registry ID

RBR-4fc5cxf

Enrollment

Registered

2026-06-01

Start date

2026-01-01

Completion date

Unknown

Last updated

2026-06-22

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

internal hemorrhoid hemorrhoid

Interventions

A randomized, controlled clinical trial will be conducted, with blinding applied to patients and to the statistician responsible for data analysis. The primary objective will be to compare postoperati

50 years or =50 years). This approach aims to minimize imbalances in demographic characteristics and recruitment volume across

Eligibility

Age

18 Years to No maximum

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: adult patients aged 18 years or older, of both sexes; clinical diagnosis of grade IV internal hemorrhoids with significant prolapse; anesthetic classification according to the american society of anesthesiologists (asa) between I and III; formal indication for surgical treatment with hemorrhoidectomy; ability to understand and sign the informed consent form (icf)

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: presence of inflammatory bowel disease; coagulation disorders; chronic use of anticoagulants with difficult reversal; pregnancy; history of anorectal surgery within the last 12 months; known allergy to anesthetic agents used in the protocol

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame
To compare postoperative clinical outcomes of conventional hemorrhoidectomy performed using a radiofrequency scalpel versus CO2 laser versus electrocautery in patients with grade IV internal hemorrhoids with prolapse.	—

Secondary

Measure	Time frame
To assess and compare the intensity of postoperative pain between groups at different time points (immediate postoperative period and days 1, 3, 7, 14, 30, and 60).;To evaluate the evolution of proctologic symptoms using the Proctologic Symptom Scale (PSS) at postoperative days 7, 14, 30, 60, 180, and 360;;To compare the incidence and severity of postoperative bleeding, according to a 4-level operational scale (grades 0 to 3), within the first 30 days;;To analyze the total number of doses of analgesics and laxatives used up to postoperative day 30;;To compare operative time and length of hospital stay between groups;;To identify and compare the incidence of early complications (up to 30 days) and late complications (after 30 days), including anal stenosis, residual skin tags, hemorrhoidal recurrence, persistent pain, and de novo incontinence, as well as to evaluate complications using the Clavien–Dindo classification.	—

Measure

Time frame

To assess and compare the intensity of postoperative pain between groups at different time points (immediate postoperative period and days 1, 3, 7, 14, 30, and 60).;To evaluate the evolution of proctologic symptoms using the Proctologic Symptom Scale (PSS) at postoperative days 7, 14, 30, 60, 180, and 360;;To compare the incidence and severity of postoperative bleeding, according to a 4-level operational scale (grades 0 to 3), within the first 30 days;;To analyze the total number of doses of analgesics and laxatives used up to postoperative day 30;;To compare operative time and length of hospital stay between groups;;To identify and compare the incidence of early complications (up to 30 days) and late complications (after 30 days), including anal stenosis, residual skin tags, hemorrhoidal recurrence, persistent pain, and de novo incontinence, as well as to evaluate complications using the Clavien–Dindo classification.

—

Countries

Contacts

Public ContactFabricio de Oliveira

Hospital São Camilo

dr.fabriciodoinpaz@icloud.comFone: +55-49-999997677

Outcome results

None listed

Source: REBEC (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Jun 29, 2026