Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36911578›Full record

ReviewCureus2023

Surgery of Simple and Complex Anal Fistulae in Adults: A Review of the Literature for Optimal Surgical Outcomes.

Anestis Charalampopoulos, Dimitrios Papakonstantinou, George Bagias, Konstantinos Nastos, Markos Perdikaris, Savvas Papagrigoriadis

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Predictors of Recurrence in Pediatric Perianal Abscess and Fistula-In-Ano: Insights From a 5-Year Surgical Cohort Study.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
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.

Anestis CharalampopoulosThird Department of Surgery, "Attikon" University General Hospital/National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, School of Medicine, Athens, GRC.
Dimitrios PapakonstantinouThird Department of Surgery, "Attikon" University General Hospital/National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, School of Medicine, Athens, GRC.
George BagiasThird Department of Surgery, "Attikon" University General Hospital/National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, School of Medicine, Athens, GRC.
Konstantinos NastosThird Department of Surgery, "Attikon" University General Hospital/National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, School of Medicine, Athens, GRC.
Markos PerdikarisThird Department of Surgery, "Attikon" University General Hospital/National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, School of Medicine, Athens, GRC.
Savvas PapagrigoriadisRectal and Pelvic Surgery, Metropolitan General Hospital Athens, Athens, GRC.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Anal fistulas are common anorectal conditions, and surgery is the primary treatment option. In the last 20 years of literature, there exist a large number of surgical procedures, especially for the treatment of complex anal fistulas, as they present more recurrences and continence problems than simple anal fistulas. To date, there are no guidelines for choosing the best technique. We conducted a recent literature review, mainly the last 20 years, based on the PubMed and Google Scholar medical databases, with the goal of identifying the surgical procedures with the highest success rates, lowest recurrence rates, and best safety profiles. Clinical trials, retrospective studies, review articles, comparative studies, recent systematic reviews, and meta-analyses for various surgical techniques, as well as the latest guidelines of the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons, the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, and the German S3 guidelines on simple and complex fistulas were reviewed. According to the literature, there is no recommendation for the optimal surgical technique. The etiology, complexity, and many other factors affect the outcome. In simple intersphincteric anal fistulas, fistulotomy is the procedure of choice. In simple low transsphincteric fistulas, the patient's selection is crucial in order to perform a safe fistulotomy or another sphincter-saving technique. The healing rate in simple anal fistulas is higher than 95% with low recurrence and without significant postoperative complications. In complex anal fistulas, only sphincter-saving techniques should be used; the optimal outcomes are obtained by the ligation of the intersphincteric fistulous tract (LIFT) and rectal advancement flaps. Those techniques assure high healing rates of 60-90%. The novel technique of the transanal opening of the intersphincteric space (TROPIS) is under evaluation. The novel sphincter-saving techniques of fistula laser closure (FiLac) and video-assisted anal fistula treatment (VAAFT) are safe, with reported healing rates ranging from 65% to 90%. Surgeons should be familiar with all sphincter-saving techniques in order to face the variability of the fistulas-in-ano. Currently, there is no universally superior technique that can treat all fistulas.

Indexed as

anal fistulacomplex anal fistulaendorectal advancement flapfistula-in-anofistulectomyfistulotomylaser fistulotomysimple fistulasurgeryvideo-assisted anal fistula treatment

Identifiers

PMID36911578
PMCPMC9993441

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.