ReviewDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Perianal Fistulae Medical Imaging Maps: A Pictorial Diagnostic Review.
Review in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. 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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Perianal fistula, or anal fistula, is an abnormal granulomatous tract connecting the anal canal or rectum to the surrounding skin. It causes perianal pain and fistulous discharge, negatively impacting patients' quality of life. The mechanism underlying fistula formation remains incompletely understood. Medical imaging is essential for accurate preoperative assessment of the shape, number and branching of fistulous tracts, identification of internal openings and Parks' classification. This pictorial review provides an image-based overview of the key medical imaging concepts essential for the diagnosis of perianal fistulae and summarises the roles, advantages and limitations of the available imaging modalities for evaluating perianal fistulae. The current evidence on X-ray fistulography, computed tomography (CT) fistulography, transcutaneous ultrasonography (TCUS), endoanal ultrasonography (EAUS) and pelvic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was reviewed, emphasising on their diagnostic performance and clinical applications. Conventional X-ray fistulography has progressively been abandoned because it is invasive, is uncomfortable for patients, provides poor soft tissue contrast and inadequately visualises anal sphincters, complex fistulous tracts, secondary branches and abscesses. CT fistulography is useful for evaluating perianal abscesses and fistula when MRI and EAUS are unavailable. TCUS is widely available, non-invasive and radiation-free but is operator-dependent and has limited ability to evaluate high perianal fistulae. EAUS accurately evaluates fistulous tracts, can be performed at the bedside or intraoperatively and is reliable when MRI is contraindicated. However, EAUS is operator-dependent, is contraindicated in patients with severe anal stenosis or acute anal pain, and has a small field of view. Pelvic MRI is the gold standard, providing excellent visualisation of anal canal anatomy, superior soft tissue contrast, accurate mapping of fistulous tracts, localisation of internal openings, assessment of the involvement of anal sphincters and detection of secondary tracts, abscesses and associated complications. Consequently, MRI is a preferred imaging modality, which can guide treatment decisions and monitoring of treatment response.
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.