ArticleAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2024
Accuracy prediction of Goodsall's rule for anal fistulas of crypotogladular origin, is still standing?
Article in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Accurate Localization of the Internal Opening in a Cryptoglandular Anal Fistula: Complementary Roles of Goodsall's Rule, MRI, and Intraoperative Assessment: A Case Report.Case reports in surgery · 2026Article
- Ultrasound assessment of low type intersphincteric perianal fistulas in Yemen.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Treatment of anal fistulas is still a challenging task because of high recurrence and risk of incontinence. Identification of internal fistula opening is paramount for successful treatment. Goodsall's rule is commonly used to predict the course of fistula and internal opening. However, its accuracy has been questioned by many investigators and its role became a controversial topic. Method: This is a case series prospective study in which 320 consecutive patients with anal fistula with Mean age 48.9± 6 years ages (ranges from 16 to 64 years) and mean body mass index 24.8± 5.5 average 18.5-30.6) were enroled. Goodsall's rule was applied to all fistulas according to the site of external fistula opening. Location of internal fistula opening as suggested by Goodsall's rule then compared to the exact location of internal opening identified by perineal or pelvic MRI and intraoperative findings. to assess the accuracy and positive predictive value of the Goodsall's rule in predicting the internal opening of the tract. Results: The overall accuracy rate, positive predictive value (PPV), sensitivity and specificity of Goodsall's rule in this study were 74.75%, 77.1, 74.5, and 72.05, respectively. The accuracy in predicting the internal fistula opening was 52.4% in anterior tracts and 73% in posterior tracts. Goodsall's rule was found to be more accurate in posterior fistulas than anterior fistulas and in short superficial fistulas rather than in long and high fistulas. Conclusion: Goodsall's rule was accurate in 74.75% of anal fistulas. It was more accurate for posterior long fistulas and anterior short and superficial fistulas. Patients with long (>3 cm) anterior fistulas defied Goodsall's rule when they found to have fistulas tracking to a midline anterior origin. Further, short posterior fistulas were found to open more commonly in a direct radial course rather to midline posteriorly.
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.