ReviewChirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany)2024
[Rectovaginal fistulas : Differentiated diagnostics and treatment].
Review in Chirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany), 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.
- Transperineal Ultrasound Combined with Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound Enema for Diagnosis and Surgical Planning in Rectovaginal Fistula: A Prospective Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- The Essential Role of High-resolution MRI Fistulogram Imaging with Ultrasound Gel Enema in Diagnosing Complex Rectovaginal Fistulas Post-Chemoradiation for Rectal Cancer: A Case Study Review.Current medical imaging · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Rectovaginal fistulas (RVF) represent less than 5% of anorectal fistulas. The classification of RVF is based on the localization (low vs. high) and the etiology. The most frequent causes of RVF are birth trauma, Crohn's disease, previous surgery and pelvic irradiation. In most cases a clinical diagnostic assessment is sufficient. Additionally, endosonography is a reliable tool to detect sphincter defects. Computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are reserved for special situations (e.g., RVF related to anastomotic leakage, after pelvic irradiation or associated with complex perianal fistulizing Crohn's disease). The surgical treatment is primarily oriented to the localization and etiology. Surgical techniques range from local procedures (e.g., endorectal advancement flap repair, transvaginal or transperineal closure) up to more invasive tissue interposition (e.g., bulbocavernosus muscle fat tissue flap or transposition of the gracilis muscle). In "high" RVF transabdominal approaches such as coloanal anastomosis, pull through procedures or omental interposition are indicated. All surgical procedures show high recurrence rates. Several operations are mostly necessary and a stoma creation is often required.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39283323What 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.