Copyright
©The Author(s) 2015.
World J Gastroenterol. Jul 14, 2015; 21(26): 8178-8183
Published online Jul 14, 2015. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v21.i26.8178
Published online Jul 14, 2015. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v21.i26.8178
Table 2 Outcome measures for long-term efficacy and safety n (%)
| Outcome measure | PPH group | Control group | χ2value | P value |
| (n = 54) | (n = 54) | |||
| Anal stenosis | 1 (1.85) | 3 (5.56) | 0.26 | 0.610 |
| Anal tenesmus | 15 (27.78) | 13 (24.07) | 0.193 | 0.661 |
| Sensory anal incontinence | 2 (3.70) | 7 (12.96) | 3.951 | 0.041 |
| Recurrence | 6 (11.11) | 9 (16.67) | 0.697 | 0.404 |
| Difficulty in defecation | 7 (12.96) | 13 (24.07) | 2.209 | 0.137 |
-
Citation: Lu M, Yang B, Liu Y, Liu Q, Wen H. Procedure for prolapse and hemorrhoids
vs traditional surgery for outlet obstructive constipation. World J Gastroenterol 2015; 21(26): 8178-8183 - URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/full/v21/i26/8178.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v21.i26.8178