Outcomes in High Perianal Fistula Repair Using Video-Assisted Anal Fistula Treatment Compared With Seton Use: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Effects of loose combined cutting seton surgery on wound healing and pain in patients with high anal fistula: A meta-analysis

A meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the effects of loose combined cutting seton surgery on wound healing and pain in patients with high anal fistula, aiming to provide evidence-based medical evidence for surgical method selection for these patients. A comprehensive computerized search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Wanfang and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases was conducted to collect all relevant studies published up to November 2023, evaluating the effects of loose combined cutting seton surgery in treating patients with high anal fistulas. Two researchers independently screened, extracted data, and assessed the quality of the identified studies. RevMan 5.4 software was employed for data analysis. Overall, 16 articles were included, comprising 1124 patients, with 567 undergoing loose combined cutting seton surgery and 557 undergoing simple cutting seton surgery. The analysis revealed patients undergoing loose combined cutting seton surgery had a higher rate of postoperative wound healing (97.44% vs. 81.69%, odds ratio [OR]: 7.49, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 4.29-13.10, p < 0.00001), shorter wound healing time (standardized mean differences [SMD]: -1.48, 95% CI: -1.89 to -1.08, p < 0.00001), lower postoperative wound pain scores (SMD: -2.51, 95% CI: -3.51 to -1.51, p < 0.00001), and a lower rate of postoperative complications (3.43% vs. 20.83%, OR: 0.13, 95% CI: 0.05-0.31, p < 0.00001). The current evidence suggests that compared to simple cutting seton surgery, loose combined cutting seton surgery in treating high anal fistulas can promote postoperative wound healing, shorten wound healing time, alleviate pain, and reduce the incidence of postoperative complications, making it a worthy clinical practice for widespread application.

Efficacy and safety of 13 surgical techniques for the treatment of complex anal fistula, non-Crohn CAF: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Considering the difficulty of treating complex anal fistula (CAF), various surgical techniques exist in clinical work. However, none are ideal. Evidence on the efficacy and safety of different surgical treatments is scarce. The authors aimed to compare the outcomes of the 13 surgical techniques and tried to find the best surgical method for treating CAF.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The authors searched worldwide databases, including Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, WanFang, VIP, and SinoMed, from inception to March 2023. All randomized controlled trials comparing the outcomes of 13 surgical techniques were included according to the PICO principles. The indicators of the cure rate, the recurrence rate, the complication rate, the operating time, the postoperative pain on day 1 (VAS), and the postoperative incontinence in month 1 (Wexner) were extracted and analyzed using STATA software 15.1, Review Manager 5.4, and GeMTC14.3.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight randomized controlled trials with a total of 2274 patients were included in the network meta-analysis. There was no statistically significant difference in the comparison among any surgical interventions in terms of the cure rate ( P >0.05 Table 2) and recurrence rate ( P >0.05 Table 3). However, in terms of complication rate, fistulectomy was lower than FPS (Median: 0.14; 95% CI: 0.02-0.70) or fistulotomy (Median: 0.09; 95% CI: 0.01-0.55), and fistulotomy was lower than EAFR (Median: 0.24; 95% CI: 0.05-0.84), LIFT (Median: 0.17; 95% CI: 0.02-0.66) or LIFT-EAFR (Median: 0.11; 95% CI: 0.01-0.69) ( P >0.05 Table 4). The surface estimated the advantages and disadvantages under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA). The ranking results indicated that fistulectomy might have the lowest complication rate (SUCRA=7.9%). Because the network results of the operating time, the postoperative pain, and the postoperative incontinence contained no closed loops, the results of their probability ranking could only be referenced, demonstrating that fistulectomy might have the shortest operating time (SUCRA=23.4%), video-assisted modified ligation of the intersphincteric fistula tract (VAMLIFT) might have the lowest postoperative pain on day 1 (VAS) (SUCRA=0.4%) and LIFT might have the lowest postoperative incontinence in month 1(Wexner) (SUCRA=16.2%).

CONCLUSION

Fistulectomy might have the lowest complication rate, which might be the relatively superior surgical technique for treating CAF.

Cutting seton for the treatment of cryptoglandular fistula-in-ano: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The use of cutting seton (CS) for the management of cryptoglandular fistula-in-ano has remained controversial because of reports of fecal incontinence, postoperative pain, and extended healing time. The aim of this review was to provide the first synthesis of studies investigating the use of CS for the treatment of cryptoglandular fistula-in-ano.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL were searched up to October 2022. Randomized controlled trials and observational studies comparing CS with alternative interventions were included, along with single-arm studies evaluating CS alone. The primary outcome was fistula-in-ano recurrence, and secondary outcomes included incontinence, healing time, proportion with complete healing, and postoperative pain. Inverse variance random-effects meta-analyses were used to pool effect estimates.

RESULTS

After screening 661 citations, 29 studies were included. Overall, 1513 patients undergoing CS (18.8% female, mean age: 43.1 years) were included. Patients with CS had a 6% (95% CI: 3-12%) risk of recurrence and a 16% (95% CI: 5-38%) risk of incontinence at 6 months. CS patients had an average healing time of 14.6 weeks (95% CI: 10-19 weeks) with 73% (95% CI: 48-89%) of patients achieving complete healing at 6 months postoperatively. There was no difference in recurrence between CS and fistulotomy, advancement flap, two-stage seton fistulotomy, or draining seton.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, this analysis shows that CS has comparable recurrence and incontinence rates to other modalities. However, this may be at the expense of more postoperative pain and extended healing time. Further comparative studies between CS and other modalities are warranted.

Comparison of clinical outcomes of anal fistula plug and endoanal advancement flap repair treating the complex anal fistula: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Anal fistula (AF) is a common disease with high prevalence and surgical operations are effective treatments in clinical work. There exist many well-known surgical techniques treating complex anal fistula (CAF), however, none is ideal. To compare the superiority of Anal fistula plug (AFP) and Endoanal advancement flap repair (EAFR) for complex anal fistula. We searched worldwide databases including Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, WanFang, VIP, and SinoMed from their inception to March 2023. Studies comparing the outcomes of AFP and EAFR were included according to the PICO principles. The indicators of the healing rate, recurrence rate, wound infection rate, and complication rate, et al. were extracted and compared between different surgical methods. 5 RCTS and 7 non-RCTs were included in the meta-analysis with a total of 847 patients (341 patients conducted with AFP and 506 patients with EAFR). By combining the total effect of the 12 articles, we found that there was a statistical difference reporting the healing rate of AFP 48.3% and EAFR 64.4% treating the CAF (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.30,1.55, P = 0.03), and EAFR has a better healing rate. However, there was no significant difference in terms of the recurrence rate (OR 1.68, 95% CI 0.80,3.54, P = 0.17), the wound infection rate (OR 1.82, 95% CI 0.95,3.52, P = 0.07), and the complication rate (OR 1.06, 95% CI 0.70,1.61, P = 0.77) either in the 12 articles or in the subgroup. The meta-analysis indicated that the EAFR was superior to AFP in terms of the healing rate treating the CAF, however, there were no significant differences between the two groups when it came to the recurrence rate, the wound infection rate, and the complication rate. EAFR might be one initial treatment for the complex cryptoglandular anal fistulas compared with AFP.