ArticleFrontiers in surgery2022
Analysis of the drainage effect of different incisions for high complex anal fistula based on FLUENT hydrodynamic simulation.
Article in Frontiers in surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The biomechanical characteristics of the trauma size and postoperative drainage of different incisions for high complex anal fistula surgery were compared by numerical simulation analysis to provide a theoretical basis for the clinical selection of minimally invasive incisions for surgery. Methods: Using FLUENT finite element software, a typical incision finite element model was established to obtain incision areas, and the total mass outlet flow within 200 s was calculated to evaluate the drainage effect of each incision. Results: The incisions with the largest to smallest areas were the curved, spindle, and curved plus extended groove incision, indicating that the curved plus extended groove incision caused the least damage to the perianal skin muscles. Conversely, the incisions with the largest to smallest total outlet flow were as follows: curved plus extended groove, spindle, curved, and straight incision, suggesting that the curved plus extended groove model had the best diversion effect, and the curved incision had better diversion effect than that of the straight incision. Conclusion: The curved plus extended groove surgical incision had the smallest incision area, minimized damage to the perianal skin and muscle tissue, conformed to the concept of minimally invasive surgery, ensured adequate drainage of exudate, maintained the normal growth of granulation tissue on the wound surface, preserved the original form of the anus, and thus better protected the function of the anus. This improved the quality of life of patients requiring high complex anal fistulas.
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.