Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29651553›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2018

Fistulectomy with primary sphincter reconstruction.

Steffen Seyfried, Dieter Bussen, Andreas Joos, Christian Galata, Christel Weiss, Alexander Herold

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of colorectal disease, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
6.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 73 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Modified Parks' Is Principally Similar to TROPIS Procedure for the Treatment of High Complex Anal Fistulas.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2021
    Article
  15. Modern surgical strategies for perianal Crohn's disease.World journal of gastroenterology · 2020
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Steffen SeyfriedDepartment of Surgery, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, 68167, Mannheim, Germany. steffen.seyfried@umm.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3239-6727
Dieter BussenDeutsches End- und Dickdarm-Zentrum, Mannheim, Germany.
Andreas JoosDeutsches End- und Dickdarm-Zentrum, Mannheim, Germany.
Christian GalataDepartment of Surgery, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, 68167, Mannheim, Germany.
Christel WeissAbteilung für Medizinische Statistik, Biomathematik und Informationsverarbeitung, Medizinische Fakultät Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany.
Alexander HeroldDeutsches End- und Dickdarm-Zentrum, Mannheim, Germany.
Heidelberg University · DEMedizinische Fakultät Mannheim

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimDespite modern medical techniques, anatomically proximal (high) anal fistulas are still a challenge in colorectal surgery. In previous years, the standard of care was complete fistulectomy with a high rate of continence disorders. Over the past 20 to 30 years, sphincter-saving procedures have gained wide acceptance. They represent the technique used in these cases. Additionally, many patients received indefinite treatment, namely the placement of a seton to maintain surgical drainage. The main problem with all fistula surgical possibilities is the high recurrence rate of 30 to 50% in flap procedures and 100% persistence in seton treatments. In recent years, a direct repair (primary reconstruction) in distal fistulas was instigated and shows excellent results. It allowed our technique for proximal (high) anal fistulas to evolve.

methodAll patients who underwent surgery at the University Medical Center Mannheim, Department of Colo-proctology (from 06/2003 to 11/2015), were retrospectively evaluated using a prospective database. Patients who underwent fistulectomy with primary sphincter reconstruction were all included.

resultsThe primary healing rate, after a mean follow-up of 11 months (7 to 200 months), was 88.2% (374 of 424). Taking into account revisionary surgeries with secondary sphincter repair, this rate reaches 95.8% (406 of 424). Factors such as gender and fistula location as related to the sphincter had significant influence on the study outcome, whereas variables such as the amount of reconstructed muscle (in mm), number of revisions, patient age, other anal operations, and concomitant medication did not. The incontinence of a subgroup of 148 patients was evaluated in detail by way of a questionnaire. Even at a preoperative baseline, 9.6% of those patients reported some minor degree of continence disorders. After the procedure, incontinence disorders were observed in 34 patients (23.0%), with 23 of these patients suffering from flatus incontinence (15.5%), 10 patients from liquid incontinence (6.8%), and 1 patient from solid fecal incontinence.

conclusionFistulectomy with primary sphincter reconstruction is a feasible procedure resulting in a low recurrence rate. No other procedure has shown better results in transsphincteric fistulas. Continence disorders seem to be of minor relevance/consequence for these patients.

Indexed as

Anal CanalFecal IncontinenceFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPostoperative ComplicationsProspective StudiesRectal FistulaRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeAnal fistulaContinenceFistulectomyPrimary reconstructionRecurrenceSeton

Identifiers

PMID29651553
OpenAlexW79609070

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.