ArticleCureus2025
Rectovaginal Fistulas, Their Surgical Management, and Outcomes: An Indian Experience.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Rectovaginal fistulas (RVFs) are abnormal epithelial-lined tracts between the rectum and vagina that significantly impact quality of life. Their etiology is varied, and most cases require surgical repair. Multiple surgical approaches exist, with varying success rates ranging from very low to high. However, data from India on surgical outcomes remain limited. This study, conducted at a tertiary care center in North India, aims to evaluate the outcomes of RVF repair and identify factors associated with surgical success. Methodology This was a retrospective analysis of prospectively maintained data of all patients (n = 72) with RVF who were managed between 2005 and 2023 at a tertiary care hospital in North India. IBM SPSS Statistics software for Windows, Version 26.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA) was used for statistical analyses. Continuous variables are presented as mean and standard deviation (SD) or median (interquartile range (IQR)), depending on normality status, while categorical variables are reported as raw values with percentages. Univariate analysis was performed using Pearson's chi-square and Fisher's exact tests. A p-value <0.05 was considered significant. Results A total of 72 patients were managed for RVF. Various etiological factors were iatrogenic injury in 23 (31.9%) patients, obstetric causes in 18 (25%) patients, malignancy in 19 (26%) patients, and congenital anomalies in five (7%) patients. Forty-eight (67%) patients required surgical intervention. Among those who underwent surgical intervention, various techniques were utilized: transvaginal layered closure in 24 (50%) patients, transvaginal advancement flap repair in 15 (31.3%) patients, transperineal layered closure with the Martius flap interposition in seven (14.6%) patients, and coloanal anastomosis in two (2.7%) patients. Fourteen (29%) patients required more than one surgical procedure. The overall success rate following surgical repair was 70.8%. No clinical or demographic factors were found to be statistically significant predictors of surgical failure. Conclusions In our study, the most common cause of RVF was iatrogenic injury. The majority of patients required surgical repair, with outcomes comparable to those reported in the literature. Among the various factors analyzed for their potential influence on surgical success, none were found to be significantly associated with the outcome.
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.