ArticleFrontiers in surgery2014
Modified plug repair with limited sphincter sparing fistulectomy in the treatment of complex anal fistulas.
Article in Frontiers in surgery, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Treatment of Fistula-In-Ano with Fistula Plug - a Review Under Special Consideration of the Technique.Frontiers in surgery · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeNew technical approaches involving biologically derived products have been used to treat complex anal fistulas in order to avoid the risk of fecal incontinence. The least invasive methods involve filling out the fistula tract with fibrin glue or introduction of an anal fistula plug into the fistula canal following thorough curettage. A review shows that the new techniques involving biologically derived products do not confer any significant advantages. Therefore, the question inevitably arises as to whether the combination of a partial or limited fistulectomy, i.e., of the extrasphincteric portion of the fistula, and preservation of the sphincter muscle by repairing the section of the complex anal fistula running through the sphincter muscle and filling it with a fistula plug produces better results.
methodsA modified plug technique was used, in which the extrasphincteric portion of the complex anal fistula was removed by means of a limited fistulectomy and the remaining section of the fistula in the sphincter muscle was repaired using the fistula plug with fixing button.
resultsOf the 52 patients with a complex anal fistula, who had undergone surgery using a modified plug repair with limited fistulectomy of the extrasphincteric part of the fistula and use of the fistula plug with fixing button, there are from 40 patients (follow-up rate: 77%) some kind of follow-up informations, after a mean of 19.32 ± 6.9 months. Thirty-two were men and eight were women, with a mean age of 52.97 ± 12.22 years. Surgery was conducted to treat 36 transsphincteric, 1 intersphincteric, and 3 rectovaginal fistulas. In 36 of 40 patients (90%), the complex anal fistulas or rectovaginal fistulas were completely healed without any sign of recurrence. None of these patients complained about continence problems.
conclusionA modification of the plug repair of complex anal fistulas with limited fistulectomy of the extrasphincteric part of the fistula and use of the plug with fixing button seems to increase the healing rate in comparison to the standard plug technique.
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.