ArticleTechniques in coloproctology2021
The REALISE score: a new statistically validated scoring system to assess the severity of anal fissures.
Article in Techniques in coloproctology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07729709 (Effect of Pulsed Electromagnetic Field on Chronic Anal Fissure Healing), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 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.
Effect of Pulsed Electromagnetic Field on Chronic Anal Fissure Healing: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 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
- The use of a methylene blue and glyceryl trinitrate-based cream for the treatment of chronic anal fissures: a phase II randomized pilot trial from a referral coloproctological unit.Techniques in coloproctology · 2025Trial
- Impact of sentinel pile on botulinum toxin treatment of chronic anal fissure: A comparative study.Techniques in coloproctology · 2026Observational
- Long-term incontinence rates after traditional lateral internal sphincterotomy: a 5-year retrospective analysis from a high-volume tertiary referral center for proctologic disorders.Techniques in coloproctology · 2025Article
- Fissurectomy with or without anoplasty for chronic anal fissures is a valid alternative to lateral internal sphincterotomy: a retrospective cohort study of 475 patients.Techniques in coloproctology · 2025Article
- Grand challenges in colorectal and proctological surgery.Frontiers in surgery · 2023Article
- Safety and efficacy of Levorag emulgel in the treatment of anal fissures using a validated scoring system.Frontiers in surgery · 2023Article
- Scanner-Assisted COFrontiers in surgery · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAnal fissure (AF) is a common, painful disease that strongly affects patients' quality of life, however, no scoring system to assess the severity of AF is available in the literature. The aim of this study was to set up and validate a reliable scoring system to quantify the severity of AF, to be used in prospective trials comparing the efficacy and the outcomes of surgical or medical treatments.
methodsThe study was conducted on patients with acute or chronic AF and a control group in a tertiary centre for coloproctology in June 2020-September 2020. Two researchers independently carried out a structured interviewer-led questionnaire at two different time points (T1/T2). The questionnaire consisted of five items selected according to the most commonly reported symptoms for AF: the item pain, was scored from 0 to 10 using a visual analogue scale, and quality of life, duration of pain, use of painkillers, and bleeding were scored from 1 to 5 using Likert-scale questions. The scoRing systEm for AnaL fIsSurE (REALISE) score was the sum of the points. Patients with AF and a control group of patients with haemorrhoids, anal fistula, or obstructed defecation syndrome entered the study. Main outcome measures were reliability, inter-/intraobserver agreement, and repeatability.
resultsOne hundred and fifty well-matched patients (75 with AF and 75 controls) were enrolled. A significant difference was found between the mean REALISE score for patients with AF and controls (p < 0.001). The two REALISE scores were highly correlated (r = 0.99). The coefficient of repeatability was 1.45 in T1 and 1.18 in T2.
conclusionsThe REALISE score may have an important role in the assessment and management of AF, in grading the severity of AF and comparing results of different treatments.
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.