ArticleAnnals of coloproctology2025
Preclinical testing of a new radiofrequency ablation device in a porcine perianal fistula model.
Article in Annals of coloproctology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07452666 (FISTULA-RFA Trial), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
FISTULA-RFA Trial (Fistula Inactivation by Segmental Thermal Uniform Lesion Ablation-Radiofrequency Ablation): A Prospective, Multicenter, Single-Arm Pilot Study in Patients With Perianal Fistula
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
purposeAnorectal fistulas present a treatment challenge, with conventional surgical methods potentially resulting in complications such as fecal incontinence. To improve patient outcomes, more effective and minimally invasive therapies are critically needed. In this study, an optimal porcine model for the creation of anorectal fistulas was developed and used to evaluate the efficacy of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) therapy.
methodsTwo distinct but related experiments were conducted. In the first experiment, a reliable and standardized porcine anorectal fistula model was developed. In the second, the healing process was assessed, and outcomes were compared between the RFA-treated group and the control group using the established porcine model.
resultsThe results indicated that a 3.5-cm fistula tract length and a 14-day evaluation period following seton removal are optimal for the porcine anorectal fistula model. In the second experiment, the RFA group tended to exhibit better outcomes regarding fistula closure, although the differences were not statistically significant. Histopathologically, no significant difference in inflammation grade was observed between groups; however, scar tissue was more predominant in the RFA group.
conclusionsThe findings suggest that RFA therapy may offer potential benefits in the treatment of anorectal fistulas, as demonstrated using a porcine model. To validate these results and explore the mechanisms of action underlying RFA therapy for anorectal fistulas, further research involving larger sample sizes and a more robust study design is required.
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.