ArticleBMC gastroenterology2025
Clinical application of the intersphincteric approach with internal incision combined with counter- drainage for deep perianal abscess.
Article in BMC gastroenterology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prospective observation study of incision and drainage vs drainage and initial fistula management for perianal abscesses.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2026Trial
- Comparison of incision and drainage procedure with drainage and ligation of the intersphincteric fistula tract in the treatment of deep perianal abscess.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Multifactorial Analysis of Postoperative Recurrence of Anal Fistula: A Retrospective Study.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 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
Abstract
purposeThis retrospective study evaluates the clinical efficacy of the Intersphincteric Approach with Internal Incision combined with Counter-Drainage (IAICD) for Deep Perianal Abscess (DPA), thereby providing a foundation for selecting optimal surgical treatment methods in clinical practice.
methodsUsing a retrospective cohort study design, we analyzed the clinical data of 120 patients who underwent inpatient surgical treatment for DPA at our hospital from January 2022 to June 2023. Of these, 57 patients underwent the IAICD (treatment group), while 63 patients received incision-drainage (control group). Clinical data from both groups were collected for statistical analysis. The primary outcomes measured were clinical efficacy, anal function scores and appearance scores. Secondary outcomes included postoperative pain, operation time, wound healing time and length of hospital stay.
resultsThe treatment group had 52 cured cases, with a cure rate of 52/57 (91.2%), whereas the control group had 48 cured cases, with a cure rate of 48/63 (76.2%). The treatment group's clinical efficacy was significantly better than the control group (P = 0.03). The operation time was longer in the treatment group compared to the control group (P < 0.01). There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of anal function scores, appearance scores, postoperative pain, wound healing time and length of hospital stay (P > 0.05). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that IAICD was a protective factor for the clinical efficacy of DPA patients (P = 0.01), While wound healing time and a history of perianal surgery were identified as independent risk factors associated with poor prognosis in patients with DPA (P = 0.039, P = 0.032).
conclusionFor patients with DPA who have high expectations for minimizing postoperative recurrence, a comprehensive preoperative evaluation-including a history of prior perianal surgery-precise intraoperative localization of the internal opening, and meticulous postoperative wound care can collectively optimize clinical outcomes. The IAICD procedure not only preserves anal sphincter function but also effectively reduces the recurrence rate of postoperative abscesses or fistula formation.
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.