Pak J Pharm Sci. 2026 Mar;39(3):744-755. doi: 10.36721/PJPS.2026.39.3.REG.15306.1.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Mixed hemorrhoids are common colorectal diseases; Mayinglong Musk Ointment and Musk Suppositories are used. Their post-PPH/RPH efficacy is unclear.
OBJECTIVE: Compare the efficacy of Mayinglong Musk Hemorrhoids Ointment and Suppository in mixed hemorrhoid patients undergoing PPH or RPH.
METHODS: A retrospective study enrolled 139 mixed hemorrhoid patients who underwent PPH/RPH at the hospital from Jan to Dec 2024; after exclusions, 131 were analyzed. They were divided into Group A (64 cases, Mayinglong Musk Hemorrhoids Ointment) and Group B (67 cases, Musk Hemorrhoids Suppository). Main outcomes included VAS, wound healing time/effect; secondary outcomes covered anal function indexes (ADP, ARP, HZL, AMSP), WCS score, postoperative complications, anal edema/exudation score and wound granulation morphology score.
RESULTS: Compared with Group A, Group B had lower VAS, WCS and wound granulation morphology scores (all P<0.05); Group A showed higher ADP, ARP, AMSP (all P<0.05), lower HZL and anal edema/exudation scores (all P<0.05) and superior wound healing time (P=0.047). No significant differences were found in wound healing effect or postoperative complication rate between the two groups (all P<0.05).
CONCLUSION: Both Mayinglong Musk Hemorrhoids Ointment and Musk Hemorrhoids Suppository benefit postoperative recovery with distinct advantages and clinical medication should be tailored to patients' specific postoperative conditions.
PMID:41620904 | DOI:10.36721/PJPS.2026.39.3.REG.15306.1