Comparative study of conventional lateral internal sphincterotomy, V-Y anoplasty, and tailored lateral internal sphincterotomy with V-Y anoplasty in the treatment of chronic anal fissure

The Italian Unitary Society of Colon-proctology (SIUCP: Società Italiana Unitaria di Colonproctologia) guidelines for the management of anal fissure

INTRODUCTION

The aim of these evidence-based guidelines is to present a consensus position from members of the Italian Unitary Society of Colon-Proctology (SIUCP: Società Italiana Unitaria di Colon-Proctologia) on the diagnosis and management of anal fissure, with the purpose to guide every physician in the choice of the best treatment option, according with the available literature.

METHODS

A panel of experts was designed and charged by the Board of the SIUCP to develop key-questions on the main topics covering the management of anal fissure and to performe an accurate search on each topic in different databanks, in order to provide evidence-based answers to the questions and to summarize them in statements. All the clinical questions were discussed by the expert panel in different rounds through the Delphi approach and, for each statement, a consensus among the experts was reached. The questions were created according to the PICO criteria, and the statements developed adopting the GRADE methodology.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with acute anal fissure the medical therapy with dietary and behavioral norms is indicated. In the chronic phase of disease, the conservative treatment with topical 0.3% nifedipine plus 1.5% lidocaine or nitrates may represent the first-line therapy, eventually associated with ointments with film-forming, anti-inflammatory and healing properties such as Propionibacterium extract gel. In case of first-line treatment failure, the surgical strategy (internal sphincterotomy or fissurectomy with flap), may be guided by the clinical findings, eventually supported by endoanal ultrasound and anal manometry.

Fissurectomy with mucosal advancement flap anoplasty: The end of a dogma?

INTRODUCTION

The goal was to compare fissurectomy with mucosal advancement flap anoplasty to fissurectomy alone in the surgical treatment of anal fissure.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This study included patients who underwent surgery in 2019 for solitary, idiopathic, non-infected, posterior anal fissure, after failure of medical treatment. The choice to perform advancement flap anoplasty was based on surgeon preference and did not depend on the fissure itself. The main endpoint was the time to relief of pain.

RESULTS

Of 599 fissurectomies performed during the study period, 226 patients (37.6% women, mean age 41.7±12.0 years old) underwent fissurectomy alone (n=182) or associated with advancement flap anoplasty (n=44). The two groups differed as to their sex ratio (33.5 vs. 54.5% women, P=0.01), body mass index (25.3±4.0 vs. 23.6±3.9, P=0.013) and Bristol score (3.2 vs. 3.4, P=0.038). Time to relief of pain, time to disappearance of bleeding and time to healing were 1.1 (0.5-2.3), 1.0 (0.5-2.1) and 2.0 (1.1-3.6) months, respectively. The rate of healing was 93.8% and the complication rate was 6.2%. The differences between the two groups for these outcomes were not statistically significant. The risk factors associated with absence of healing were age ≥ 40 years (Odds ratio (OR): 3.84; 95% CI, 1.12-17.68) and pre-surgical duration of fissure<35.6 weeks (OR: 6.54; 95% CI: 1.69-43.21).

CONCLUSION

Mucosal advancement flap anoplasty does not provide any added value to fissurectomy alone.

Mucosal vs. cutaneous advancement flaps for the treatment of chronic anal fissures: a randomized clinical trial

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to compare two surgical treatment methods for chronic anal fissures (CAF), mucosal advancement flap anoplasty (MAFA) and cutaneous advancement flap anoplasty (CAFA).

METHODS

A randomized, blinded clinical trial was conducted on patients with CAF refractory to medical treatment referred to a tertiary-level hospital between January 2021 and December 2022. The patients were assigned to two groups by block randomization and were compared in terms of outcome, pain reduction, and complications.

RESULTS

There were 30 patients (male to female ratio 2:3, median age 42 years [range 25-59 years]). Both techniques reduced anal pain significantly (p = 0.001); however, there were no significant differences between MAFA and CAFA groups in recurrence, duration of healing, postoperative pain, and postoperative bleeding. No patient suffered from fecal incontinence (Wexner score = 0) or flap necrosis postoperatively. Only two patients in the MAFA group (1 and 3 months after surgery) and one patient in the CAFA group (2 months after surgery) had recurrence (total recurrence rate = 10%, healing rate = 90%). All of the patients were satisfied with their surgical results.

CONCLUSION

Mucosal and cutaneous anal advancement flap techniques are effective and comparable surgical procedures for the treatment of chronic anal fissures with minimal complications, fast healing process, and minimal postoperative pain and complications.

CLINICAL TRIAL ID

IRCT20120129008861N4 ( www.irct.ir ).

Faecal incontinence in adults

Faecal incontinence, which is defined by the unintentional loss of solid or liquid stool, has a worldwide prevalence of ≤7% in community-dwelling adults and can markedly impair quality of life. Nonetheless, many patients might not volunteer the symptom owing to embarrassment. Bowel disturbances, particularly diarrhoea, anal sphincter trauma (obstetrical injury or previous surgery), rectal urgency and burden of chronic illness are the main risk factors for faecal incontinence; others include neurological disorders, inflammatory bowel disease and pelvic floor anatomical disturbances. Faecal incontinence is classified by its type (urge, passive or combined), aetiology (anorectal disturbance, bowel symptoms or both) and severity, which is derived from the frequency, volume, consistency and nature (urge or passive) of stool leakage. Guided by the clinical features, diagnostic tests and therapies are implemented stepwise. When simple measures (for example, bowel modifiers such as fibre supplements, laxatives and anti-diarrhoeal agents) fail, anorectal manometry and other tests (endoanal imaging, defecography, rectal compliance and sensation, and anal neurophysiological tests) are performed as necessary. Non-surgical options (diet and lifestyle modification, behavioural measures, including biofeedback therapy, pharmacotherapy for constipation or diarrhoea, and anal or vaginal barrier devices) are often effective, especially in patients with mild faecal incontinence. Thereafter, perianal bulking agents, sacral neuromodulation and other surgeries may be considered when necessary.

A systematic review and network meta-analysis comparing treatments for anal fissure

BACKGROUND

There are multiple treatments for anal fissures. These range from medical treatment to surgical procedures, such as sphincterotomy. The aim of this study was to compare the relative clinical outcomes and effectiveness of interventional treatments for anal fissure.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials were identified by means of a PRISMA-compliant systematic review using the Medline, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases. Inclusion criteria were randomized controlled trials comparing treatments for anal fissure. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed using BUGSnet package in R. Outcomes of interest were healing (6-8-, 10-16-, and >16-week follow-up), symptom recurrence, pain (measured on a visual analog scale), and fecal or flatus incontinence. PROPSERO Registration: CRD42021229615.

RESULTS

Sixty-nine randomized controlled trials were included in the analysis. Lateral sphincterotomy remains the treatment with the highest odds of healing compared to botulinum toxin and medical therapy at all follow-up time points. There was no significant difference in healing between botulinum toxin and medical therapy at any time point. Advancement flap showed similar effectiveness compared to lateral sphincterotomy. Medical treatment and botulinum toxin had the highest pain scores at follow-up. Sphincterotomy had the highest odds of fecal and flatus incontinence.

CONCLUSION

Lateral sphincterotomy had the highest rates of healing and should be considered as the definitive treatment after failed initial therapy with botulinum toxin or medical treatment. Botulinum toxin was equally effective compared to medical treatment. Advancement flap shows similar effectiveness compared to lateral sphincterotomy, but more studies are needed to evaluate its efficacy.

Comparison of Different Doses Botulinum Toxin Type a Efficacy in Chronic Anal Fissure Treatment

Objective: To compare the results of chronic anal fissure treatment with 10 IU and 40 IU botulinum toxin type A.

Patients and methods: 56 patients were enrolled in case-control study divided into 2 groups consistent by the main clinical criteria. 28 patients in the study group had fissure excision in combination with 10 IU botulinum toxin type A (Xeomin) injection into internal anal sphincter, while 28 patients in control group received 40 IU product injections.

Results: No statistically significant results in the pain assessment during the day and after bowel movement were obtained (p=0.41 and p=0.93, respectively). The groups were comparable by the frequency of complications such as transient anal incontinence, perianal skin hematoma, acute urinary retention (p>0.05). Complications such as thrombosis of external hemorrhoids and chronic non-healing wounds were most common in the study group (p=0.43 and p=0.0005, respectively). The product dose increase to 40 IU has a more significant effect on the functional treatment results (p=0.0053 and p=0.0002, respectively) and increases the odds for postoperative wound epithelialization 15-fold (p=0.01). Conclusion: 40 IU Botulinum toxin type A shows improvement in the treatment of chronic anal fissure without any increased risk of postoperative complications.

Anocutaneous advancement flap provides a quicker cure than fissurectomy in surgical treatment for chronic anal fissure-a retrospective, observational study

Purpose

Anocutaneous advancement flap is a surgical procedure for the treatment of chronic anal fissures. This study aimed to assess the results of anocutaneous advancement flap in a consecutive cohort of patients.

Methods

This is a retrospective, observational study. From 2000 to 2011, 481 patients had been operated for a single chronic anal fissure at the Maingau Clinic of the German Red Cross in Frankfurt am Main. The intention was to excise the fissure by fissurectomy (FIS) and then to cover the wound primarily with an anocutaneous advancement flap (AAF). The primary outcomes were resolution of symptoms and healing rates 1 month postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included incidences of early and late complications, postoperative incontinence, and recurrent fissure.

Results

Anocutaneous advancement flap was performed in 455 (94.6%). In 26 (5.4%) patients, AAF failed due to lacking skin and the wound left open after FIS. One month postoperatively, half of the patients with AAF were free of symptoms (53.2%) with complete wound healing (47.9%). The incidence of early complications within 1 month postoperatively was 0.9% after AAF. From 1 month to 5 years after operation anal abscesses and fistula occurred in 2.9%. Mild symptoms of anal incontinence were recorded in 0.2% and recurrent chronic anal fissure in 3.3% of patients. Subgroup analysis revealed improved wound healing 1 month postoperatively in patients with AAF compared to FIS.

Conclusion

Anocutaneous advancement flap is a very safe sphincter-sparing surgical option for CAF, provides a quicker cure than fissurectomy, and may be considered a good first-line surgical treatment option for chronic anal fissures if medical treatment failed.

Tools for fecal incontinence assessment: lessons for inflammatory bowel disease trials based on a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Fecal incontinence is a disabling condition affecting up to 20% of women.

OBJECTIVE

We investigated fecal incontinence assessment in both inflammatory bowel disease and non-inflammatory bowel disease patients to propose a diagnostic approach for inflammatory bowel disease trials.

METHODS

We searched on Pubmed, Embase and Cochrane Library for all studies on adult inflammatory bowel disease and non-inflammatory bowel disease patients reporting data on fecal incontinence assessment from January 2009 to December 2019.

RESULTS

In total, 328 studies were included; 306 studies enrolled non-inflammatory bowel disease patients and 22 studies enrolled inflammatory bowel disease patients. In non-inflammatory bowel disease trials the most used tools were the Wexner score, fecal incontinence quality of life questionnaire, Vaizey score and fecal incontinence severity index (in 187, 91, 62 and 33 studies). Anal manometry was adopted in 41.2% and endoanal ultrasonography in 34.0% of the studies. In 142 studies (46.4%) fecal incontinence evaluation was performed with a single instrument, while in 64 (20.9%) and 100 (32.7%) studies two or more instruments were used. In inflammatory bowel disease studies the Wexner score, Vaizey score and inflammatory bowel disease quality of life questionnaire were the most commonly adopted tools (in five (22.7%), five (22.7%) and four (18.2%) studies). Anal manometry and endoanal ultrasonography were performed in 45.4% and 18.2% of the studies.

CONCLUSION

Based on prior validation and experience, we propose to use the Wexner score as the first step for fecal incontinence assessment in inflammatory bowel disease trials. Anal manometry and/or endoanal ultrasonography should be taken into account in the case of positive questionnaires.

S3-Leitlinie: Analfissur

Die Analfissur ist eine der häufigsten Pathologien, welche sich dem Proktologen präsentiert. Entsprechend ist es wichtig, verlässliche Leitlinien dazu zu entwickeln. Die aktuelle Leitlinie wurde anhand eines systematischen Literaturreview von einem interdisziplinären Expertengremium diskutiert und verabschiedet.

Die akute Analfissur, soll auf Grund ihrer hohen Selbstheilungstendenz konservativ behandelt werden. Die Heilung wird am besten durch die Einnahme von Ballaststoff reicher Ernährung und einer medikamentösen Relaxation durch Kalziumkanal-Antagonisten (CCA) unterstützt. Zur Behandlung der chronischen Analfissur (CAF), soll den Patienten eine medikamentöse Behandlung zur „chemischen Sphinkterotomie“ mittels topischer CCA oder Nitraten angeboten werden. Bei Versagen dieser Therapie, kann zur Relaxation des inneren Analsphinkters Botulinumtoxin injiziert werden. Es ist belegt, dass die operativen Therapien effektiver sind. Deshalb kann eine Operation schon als primäre Therapie oder nach erfolgloser medikamentöser Therapie erfolgen. Die Fissurektomie, evtl. mit zusätzlicher Botulinumtoxin Injektion oder Lappendeckung, ist die Operation der Wahl. Obwohl die laterale Internus Sphinkterotomie die CAF effektiver heilt, bleibt diese wegen dem höheren Risiko für eine postoperative Stuhlinkontinenz eine Option für Einzelfälle.

Treatment of anal fissure: a survey of surgical practice in Australia and New Zealand

AIM

The aim was to determine whether or not the clinical management of anal fissure in Australia and New Zealand accords with published guidelines.

METHODS

A comprehensive survey based on common clinical scenarios was distributed to 206 colorectal surgeons in Australia and New Zealand.

RESULTS

The response rate was 44% (91 surgeons). For 19 topic areas, only seven (37%) reached consensus (defined as > 70% majority opinion). Of these, six (86%) agreed with guideline recommendations. Twelve (63%) topic areas demonstrated community equipoise (defined as less than or equal to 70% majority opinion), of which five (42%) agreed with guideline recommendations and seven (58%) disagreed with guidelines. Of the seven topics that disagreed with guidelines, three were based on moderate quality evidence (first line management of acute anal fissure in a young patient, fissure healing and faecal incontinence rates following anocutaneous flap) and four were based on low quality evidence (length of sphincter division during a lateral sphincterotomy in women, management of chronic low-pressure anal fissures postpartum, fissure healing rate following anoplasty with botulinum toxin or sphincterotomy and faecal incontinence rates following repeat sphincterotomy for recurrence). Consensus and/or agreement with guidelines were more prevalent in management when medical therapy failed.

CONCLUSION

While areas of consensus mostly agreed with guideline recommendations, there remain many areas of community equipoise which warrant further research.

Long-term Outcome of a Fissurectomy: A Prospective Single-Arm Study of 50 Operations out of 349 Initial Patients

Purpose

The surgical standard of care for patients with chronic anal fissure is still disputed. We aimed to assess the natural course of idiopathic anal fissure and the long-term outcome of a fissurectomy as a surgical treatment.

Methods

All consecutive patients referred to a single expert practitioner in a tertiary centre were primarily included. A fissurectomy was proposed in cases of refractory symptoms after 4 to 6 weeks of standard medical management. Only patients with idiopathic and noninfected anal fissures were included in this second subsample to undergo surgery. Conventional postoperative management was prescribed for all patients who had undergone surgery. The main outcome measures were the success rate (defined as a combination of wound healing and relief of pain) and postoperative anal continence.

Results

Three hundred forty-nine patients were primarily recruited. Fifty patients finally underwent surgery for an idiopathic and noninfected fissure. Among them, 47 (94%) were cured at the end of primary follow-up, and 44 of the 47 (93.6%) could be confirmed as being sustainably cured in the longer-term follow-up. The mean time of complete healing was 10.3 weeks (range, 5.7–36.4 weeks). All patients were free of pain at weeks 42. The continence score after surgery was not statistically different from the preoperative score.

Conclusion

A fissurectomy for the treatment of patients with an idiopathic noninfected fissure is associated with rapid pain relief and a high success rate even though complete healing may often be delayed. Moreover, it appears to have no adverse effect on continence.

Anal advancement flap versus lateral internal sphincterotomy for chronic anal fissure- a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Chronic anal fissures (CAF) are common and associated with reduced quality of life. Lateral internal sphincterotomy (LIS) is frequently carried out but carries a significant risk of anal incontinence. Anal advancement flap (AAF) has been advocated as an alternative, 'sphincter-preserving' procedure. We aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the efficacy of both techniques in the treatment of CAF.

METHODS

The online databases of PubMed/Medline, CINAHL, EMBASE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception to January 2017. All studies that investigated and reported outcomes of LIS and AAF for treatment of CAF were included. The primary outcome measure was anal incontinence while secondary outcomes included unhealed fissure and wound complication rates. Random effects models were used to calculate pooled effect size estimates.

RESULTS

Four studies (2 randomized controlled trials and 2 retrospective studies) describing 300 patients (150 LIS, 150 AAF) fulfilled our inclusion criteria. There was significant clinical heterogeneity among the trials. On random effects analysis, AAF was associated with a significantly lower rate of anal incontinence compared to LIS (OR = 0.06, 95% CI = 0.01 to 0.36, p = .002). However, there were no statistically significant differences in unhealed fissure (OR = 2.21, 95% CI = 0.25 to 19.33, p = .47) or wound complication rates (OR = 1.41, 95% CI = 0.50 to 4.99 p = .51) between AAF and LIS.

CONCLUSIONS

AAF is associated with less incontinence, but similar wound complications as well as a similar rate of unhealed fissures compared to LIS. However, further well-executed, multi-centre randomized trials are required to provide stronger evidence.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the treatment of anal fissure

BACKGROUND

Anal fissure has a very large number of treatment options. The choice is difficult. In an effort to assist in that, choice presented here is a systematic review and meta-analysis of all published treatments for anal fissure that have been studied in randomized controlled trials.

METHODS

Randomized trials were sought in the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, Medline, EMBASE and the trials registry sites clinicaltrials.gov and who/int/ictrp/search/en. Abstracts were screened, full-text studies chosen, and finally eligible studies selected and abstracted. The review was then divided into those studies that compared two or more surgical procedures and those that had at least one arm that was non-surgical. Studies were further categorized by the specific interventions and comparisons. The outcome assessed was treatment failure. Negative effects of treatment assessed were headache and anal incontinence. Risk of bias was assessed for each study, and the strength of the evidence of each comparison was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach.

RESULTS

One hundred and forty-eight eligible trials were found and assessed, 31 in the surgical group and 117 in the non-surgical group. There were 14 different operations described in the surgical group and 29 different non-surgical treatments in the non-surgical group along with partial lateral internal sphincterotomy (LIS). There were 61 different comparisons. Of these, 47 were reported in 2 or fewer studies, usually with quite small patient samples. The largest single comparison was glyceryl trinitrate (GTN) versus control with 19 studies. GTN was more effective than control in sustained cure (OR 0.68; 95% CI 0.63-0.77), but the quality of evidence was very poor because of severe heterogeneity, and risk of bias due to inadequate clinical follow-up. The only comparison to have a GRADE quality of evidence of high was a subgroup analysis of LIS versus any medical therapy (OR 0.12; CI 0.07-0.21). Most of the other studies were downgraded in GRADE due to imprecision.

CONCLUSIONS

LIS is superior to non-surgical therapies in achieving sustained cure of fissure. Calcium channel blockers were more effective than GTN and with less risk of headache, but with only a low quality of evidence. Anal incontinence, once thought to be a frequent risk with LIS, was found in various subgroups in this review to have a risk between 3.4 and 4.4%. Among the surgical studies, manual anal stretch performed worse than LIS in the treatment of chronic anal fissure in adults. For those patients requiring surgery for anal fissure, open LIS and closed LIS appear to be equally efficacious, with a moderate GRADE quality of evidence. All other GRADE evaluations of procedures were low to very low due mostly to imprecision.

Does the duration of symptoms of anal fissure impact its response to conservative treatment? A prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Conservative treatment is the first line of treatment for anal fissure. The current study aimed to evaluate the impact of symptom duration on the response of anal fissure to conservative treatment.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This prospective study was conducted on sixty patients with acute or chronic anal fissure who were treated conservatively with bulking agents, Sitz baths, and topical glyceryl trinitrate (GTN) 0.2%. Pain and constipation were assessed prior to treatment and at 6 weeks after therapy using visual analogue scale (VAS) and Wexner constipation score. Adverse effects as headache and postural hypotension were also queried.

RESULTS

The mean pre-treatment VAS for acute fissure was significantly higher than chronic fissure (8.8 ± 0.96 Vs 5.8 ± 1.12), also the post-treatment VAS for acute fissure was significantly lower at 6 weeks of treatment (0.47 ± 0.8 Vs 2.5 ± 1.3). The baseline Wexner constipation score was comparable in both groups; however, at six weeks of treatment it declined more significantly in patients with acute fissure. Patients with acute fissure achieved significantly better healing than chronic fissure (80% Vs 40%). Healing rates decreased from 100% in patients with symptoms < one month to 33.3% in patients with symptoms >6 months.

CONCLUSION

Conservative treatment including topical GTN 0.2% significantly hastened healing and relieved pain and other symptoms of acute more than chronic anal fissure. Healing rates of anal fissure in response to conservative treatment showed remarkable decrease in proportion to the duration of complaint.

Operative and medical treatment of chronic anal fissures-a review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Anal fissures are a common problem and have a cumulative lifetime incidence of 11%. Previous reviews on anal fissures show inconsistent results regarding post-interventional healing and incontinence rates. In this review our aim was to compare the treatments for chronic anal fissures by incorporating indirect comparisons using network meta-analysis. The PubMed database was searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published between 1975 and 2015. The primary outcome measures were healing and incontinence rates after lateral internal sphincterotomy (LIS), anal dilatation (DILA), anoplasty and/or fissurectomy (FIAP), botulinum toxin (BT) and noninvasive treatment (NIT). Random effects network meta-analyses were complemented by fixed effects and Bayesian models. The present analysis included 44 RCTs and 3268 patients. After a median follow-up of 2 months, the healing rates for LIS, DILA, FIAP, BT and NIT were 93.1, 84.4, 79.8, 62.6, and 58.6% and the incontinence rates were 9.4, 18.2, 4.9, 4.1, and 3.0%, respectively. Compared with NIT, the odds ratio (OR) [95% confidence interval (CI)] for healing after LIS, DILA, FIAP and BT was 9.9 (5.4-18.1), 8.6 (3.1-24.0), 3.5 (1.0-12.7) and 1.9 (1.1-3.5), respectively, on network meta-analysis. The OR (95% CI) for incontinence after LIS, DILA, FIAP and BT was 6.8 (3.1-15.1), 16.9 (6.0-47.8), 3.9 (1.0-15.1) and 1.6 (0.7-3.7), respectively. Ranking of treatments, fixed effects and Bayesian models confirmed these findings. In conclusion, based on our meta-analysis LIS is the most efficacious treatment but is compromised by a high rate of postoperative incontinence. Given the trade-offs between the risks and benefits, FIAP and BT might be good alternatives for the treatment of chronic anal fissures.

Dermal Flap Advancement Combined with Conservative Sphincterotomy in the Treatment of Chronic Anal Fissure

Lateral internal sphincterotomy (LIS) is considered the surgical treatment of choice for chronic anal fissure (CAF). Flap techniques for fissure coverage have the advantage of primary wound healing, potentially providing better functional results and faster pain relief. The standard surgical strategy for CAF consisting of conventional LIS (CLIS) up tothe dentate line was modified by “tailoring” the LIS to the apex of the CAF, but never greater than 1 cm, and by advancing a dermal flap for coverage of the CAF (LIS + flap) after fissurectomy. Thirty consecutive patients who underwent “LIS + flap” were compared with 32 patients who had been previously treated by CLIS. A modified, trapezoidlike Y-V flap from perianal skin was advanced into the CAF base. Pain at the first postoperative day, pain at defecation during the first week, postoperative use of analgesics, and time for patients’ pain relief were significantly less at the “LIS + flap” group ( P < 0.01). Objective healing was achieved faster ( P < 0.01) and soiling episodes were less ( P < 0.05) after “LIS + flap.” The addition of a dermal flap after “conservative” LIS resulted in better healing and significantly less postoperative discomfort than the isolated application of CLIS.