COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF POSTOPERATIVE OUTCOMES BETWEEN MINIMALLY INVASIVE PROCEDURE FOR HAEMORRHOIDS (MIPH) AND CHIVATE'S TRANSANAL SUTURE RECTOPEXY: A PROSPECTIVE OBSERVATIONAL STUDY

Background: Hemorrhoidal disease is a common anorectal disorder requiring surgery. Minimally Invasive Procedure for Haemorrhoids (MIPH) and Chivate's transanal suture rectopexy are tissue-preserving alternatives to conventional haemorrhoidectomy, but direct comparative evidence remains limited.
Objective: To compare postoperative outcomes between MIPH and Chivate's transanal suture rectopexy in patients undergoing haemorrhoid surgery.
Methods: This prospective observational study was conducted over 21 months at a tertiary teaching hospital in Gujarat, India. Sixty-four patients with Grade II–IV haemorrhoids were enrolled by convenient sampling and allocated to Chivate's procedure (n = 32) or MIPH (n = 32). Operative time, bleeding, postoperative pain (Wong–Baker FACES scale) on days 1, 3, and 7, hospital stay, complications, 3-month recurrence, and patient outcomes were compared using unpaired t-tests and chi-square tests.
Results: Operative time was significantly shorter with Chivate's procedure (32.6 ± 5.4 vs 38.5 ± 6.7 minutes, p = 0.0002). Pain scores were significantly lower on days 1, 3, and 7 (1.8 ± 1.1 vs 4.2 ± 1.3; 0.9 ± 0.9 vs 2.8 ± 1.2; 0.5 ± 0.6 vs 1.6 ± 0.9; all p < 0.0001). Time to first urination, bowel movement, and hospital stay was significantly shorter with Chivate's procedure. Three-month recurrence was lower (3.1% vs 18.8%, p = 0.045), while complications and satisfaction were similar.
Conclusion: Chivate's transanal suture rectopexy demonstrated less postoperative pain, faster clinical recovery, shorter hospital stay, and lower short-term recurrence than MIPH, with comparable complications.