ArticleMiddle East journal of digestive diseases2025
Outcomes of Draining Seton Insertion Followed by Ligation of the Intersphincteric Fistula Tract Versus Cutting Seton Insertion for Anal Fistula: A 5-Year Retrospective Cohort Study.
Article in Middle East journal of digestive diseases, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This study aimed to compare healing time, recurrence rates, incidence of incontinence, and quality of life between the ligation of the intersphincteric fistula tract (LIFT) procedure (preceded by draining seton insertion) and cutting seton insertion for anal fistula over a 5-year period. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted on patients with high-type perianal fistulas who underwent either LIFT (preceded by draining seton insertion) or cutting seton insertion between May 16, 2018, and April 17, 2024, at Shahid Faghihi and Ghadir mother and child hospitals. A comparative analysis was performed to evaluate healing time, recurrence rates, incidence of incontinence, and quality of life between the two surgical approaches. Results: The study included 51 patients who underwent LIFT surgery and 48 who received cutting seton insertion. There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of demographic characteristics or behavioral factors. Additionally, no statistically significant differences were observed between the two groups regarding fecal incontinence, healing rates, recurrence, healing time, and quality of life ( Conclusion: This study provides valuable insights into the comparison of the efficacy of cutting seton insertion versus the LIFT procedure for managing anal fistulas. By evaluating key postoperative outcomes, the findings may help in clinical decision-making and enhance patient care strategies in colorectal surgery.
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.