ArticleTechniques in coloproctology2024
Comparative outcomes of standard laser fistula closure (filac) versus filac combined with advancement flap in the treatment of complex anal fistulas.
Article in Techniques in coloproctology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effectiveness of Laser-Based Fistula Therapies with and without Adjunctive Measures in Anal Fistulas Management: A Systematic Review and Single-Arm Meta-Analysis.International journal of colorectal disease · 2025Pooled it
- A novel sphincter-sparing procedure for seton removal in complex perianal fistulas: the FiLaFlap technique.Techniques in coloproctology · 2025Article
- Evidence outside the box: Minimally invasive treatment for anal fistula.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Review
- Combined Parks Seton placement and transanal sphincterotomy improves outcome and reduces recurrence in high-position complex anal fistula.American journal of translational research · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThis study aims to compare the clinical outcomes of patients treated for complex anal fistulas using standard laser fistula closure (FiLaC) versus FiLaC combined with an advancement flap (+FLAP).
methodsA retrospective review was conducted on patients treated for complex anal fistulas between January 2022 and December 2023. Treatments included standard FiLaC and FiLaC combined with an advancement flap. Main outcome measures included operation duration, hospital stay, postoperative pain [Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score], complications, and success rate.
resultsA total of 47 patients were included in the study, with 25 in the standard FiLaC group and 22 in the +FLAP group. The +FLAP group had significantly longer operation times (29.7 ± 4.7 min versus 18.7 ± 4.0 min, p < 0.001) and hospital stays (16.2 ± 5.04 h versus 3.9 ± 2.3 h p < 0.001). Postoperative pain scores were similar between groups. The mean follow-up periods for the FILAC and +FLAP groups were 10.5 ± 3.5 months and 8.4 ± 4.0 months, respectively. The success rate was significantly higher in the +FLAP group (95.5% versus 72%, p = 0.03).
conclusionIn this study, we found that, compared with FiLAC alone, combining FiLaC with an advancement flap may significantly improve primary success rates in the treatment of complex anal fistulas, and we believe this approach could be a valuable option for enhancing treatment outcomes in complex cases. The increased operation and hospital stay durations appear to be balanced by the higher success rates.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39623200What 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.