Needle aspiration treatment vs. incision of acute simple perianal abscess: randomized controlled study.

purposeNeedle aspiration of an acute simple perianal abscess may be an alternative to conventional incision drainage with potential advantages in wound healing, functional outcome, and quality of life. The aim and objectives of the study are to compare the outcome of needle aspiration and postoperative antibiotics with that of conventional surgical incision drainage of acute perianal abscess. The primary outcome was abscess recurrence. Secondary outcomes were fistula formation, wound healing, quality of life, and fecal continence.

methodsThis is a three-center randomized controlled trial, including adults with acute perianal abscess. The needle aspiration group received clindamycin for one week postoperatively. All included patients were scheduled for a follow-up at 2, 12, and 52 weeks postoperatively including physical examination, quality of life assessment (SF 36 questionnaire), and fecal continence (Wexner score).

resultsA total of 98 patients were included. The recurrence rate was 41% in needle aspiration and 15% in incision drainage, with HR of 3.033 (p = 0.014). Fistula formation was 15% without significant difference between the groups. There was no significant difference in wound healing, quality of life, or fecal incontinence scores.

conclusionNeedle aspiration with postoperative antibiotics cannot be recommended as an alternative for surgical incision in the treatment of acute perianal abscess. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.org with identification number NCT02585141, initial release on 15 October 2015.