ArticleIranian Red Crescent medical journal2014
Comparison of topical nifedipine with oral nifedipine for treatment of anal fissure: a randomized controlled trial.
Article in Iranian Red Crescent medical journal, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07659665 (The Effect of Oral Nifedipine Versus Placebo on Postoperative Pain and Healing Following Hemorrhoidectomy in Adult Patients), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
The Effect of Oral Nifedipine Versus Placebo on Postoperative Pain and Healing Following Hemorrhoidectomy in Adult Patients: A Randomized Controlled Trial in Sana'a, Yemen
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy and safety of topical vs. oral calcium channel blockers for chronic anal fissures: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Pooled it
- Comparative Evaluation of Effects of Oral Diltiazem and Topical Diltiazem (2%) Ointment in the Treatment of Chronic Anal Fissure: A Prospective Randomized Study.Middle East journal of digestive diseases · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMedical sphincterotomy has gained popularity as a treatment for anal fissure. Calcium channel blockers in topical forms could also be appropriate with low adverse effects.
objectivesThis was a prospective randomized controlled trial to compare topical and oral nifedipine in the treatment of chronic anal fissure. PATIENTS AND
methodsA prospective randomized controlled trial was conducted at two centers of Shahed University. One hundred and thirty patients with chronic anal fissure aged 18 to 60 years managed in our clinics were included in this study. The patients were randomly divided into two groups. Sixty-five patients received topical nifedipine (TN) and the same number received oral nifedipine (ON).
resultsUlcer healing occurred in 43 (73.33%) of topical nifedipine group compared to 29 (49.5%) patients in oral nifedipine, which was significantly different (P < 0.05). Side effects such as headache and flushing in oral nifedipine group were more prevalent than topical nifedipine, which was statistically different. Recurrence rates were the same after six months of follow-up.
conclusionsAlthough oral nifedipine can reduce symptom and signs of anal fissure, topical nifedipine has a superior role for anal fissure treatment with higher healing rate and lower side effects.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.