Sluckin TC, Gispen WH, Jongenotter J, Hazen SJA, Smeets S, van der Bilt JDW, Smeenk RM, Schouten R. Treatment of cryptoglandular fistulas with the fistula tract laser closure (FiLaC™) method in comparison with standard methods: first results of a multicenter retrospective comparative study in the Netherlands.
Tech Coloproctol 2022;
26:797-803. [PMID:
35749023 DOI:
10.1007/s10151-022-02644-7]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/24/2022] [Accepted: 05/20/2022] [Indexed: 01/23/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Current surgical closure techniques for sphincter-sparing treatment of high cryptoglandular fistulas in the Netherlands include the mucosal advancement flap procedure (MAF) and ligation of the intersphincteric fistula tract (LIFT). A relatively novel treatment is the fistula tract laser closure (FiLaC™) method. The aim of this study was to investigate the differences in healing and recurrence rates between FiLaC™ and current standard practices.
METHODS
This multicenter retrospective cohort study included both primary and recurrent high cryptoglandular anorectal fistulas, treated with either FiLaC™ or standard methods (MAF or LIFT) between September 2015 and July 2020. Patients with extrasphincteric fistulas, Crohn's disease, multiple fistulas, age < 18 years or missing data regarding healing time or recurrence were excluded. The primary outcomes were the clinical primary and secondary healing and recurrence rates. Primary healing was defined as a closed external opening without fluid discharge within 6 months of treatment on examination, while secondary healing was the same endpoint after secondary treatment. Secondary outcomes included healing time and complaints.
RESULTS
A total of 162 high fistulas from 3 Dutch hospitals were included. Ninety-nine high fistulas were treated with FiLaC™ and 63 with either MAF or LIFT. There were no significant differences between FiLaC™ and MAF/LIFT in terms of clinical healing (55.6% versus 58.7%, p = .601), secondary healing (70.0% versus 69.2%, p = .950) or recurrence rates (49.5% versus 54%, p = .420), respectively. Median follow-up duration was 7.1 months in the FiLaC™ group (interquartile range [IQR] 4.1-14.4 months) versus 6 months in the control group (IQR 3.5-8.1 months).
CONCLUSIONS
FiLaC™ treatment of high anorectal fistulas does not appear to be inferior to MAF or LIFT. Based on these preliminary results, FiLaC™ can be considered as a worthwhile treatment option for high cryptoglandular fistulas. Prospective studies with a longer follow-up period and well-determined postoperative parameters such as complication rates, magnetic resonance imaging for confirmation of fistula healing, incontinence and quality of life are warranted.
Collapse