Comparison of a fistulectomy and a fistulotomy with marsupialization in the management of a simple anal fistula: a randomized, controlled pilot trial.

Bhupendra Kumar Jain, Kumar Vaibhaw, Pankaj Kumar Garg, Sanjay Gupta, Debajyoti Mohanty
{"title":"Comparison of a fistulectomy and a fistulotomy with marsupialization in the management of a simple anal fistula: a randomized, controlled pilot trial.","authors":"Bhupendra Kumar Jain,&nbsp;Kumar Vaibhaw,&nbsp;Pankaj Kumar Garg,&nbsp;Sanjay Gupta,&nbsp;Debajyoti Mohanty","doi":"10.3393/jksc.2012.28.2.78","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This randomized clinical trial was conducted to compare a fistulectomy and a fistulotomy with marsupialization in the management of a simple anal fistula.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Forty patients with simple anal fistula were randomized into two groups. Fistulous tracts were managed by using a fistulectomy (group A) while a fistulotomy with marsupialization was performed in group B. The primary outcome measure was wound healing time while secondary outcome measures were operating time, postoperative wound size, postoperative pain, wound infection, anal incontinence, recurrence and patient satisfaction.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Postoperative wounds in group B healed earlier in comparison to group A wounds (4.85 ± 1.39 weeks vs. 6.75 ± 1.83 weeks, P = 0.035). No significant differences existed between the operating times (28.00 ± 6.35 minutes vs. 28.20 ± 6.57 minutes, P = 0.925) and visual analogue scale scores for postoperative pain on the first postoperative day (4.05 ± 1.47 vs. 4.50 ± 1.32, P = 0.221) for the two groups. Postoperative wounds were larger in group A than in group B (2.07 ± 0.1.90 cm(2) vs. 1.23 ± 0.87 cm(2)), however this difference did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.192). Wound discharge was observed for a significantly longer duration in group A than in group B (4.10 ± 1.91 weeks vs. 2.75 ± 1.71 weeks, P = 0.035). There were no differences in social and sexual activities after surgery between the patients of the two groups. No patient developed anal incontinence or recurrence during the follow-up period of twelve weeks.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In comparison to a fistulectomy, a fistulotomy with marsupialization results in faster healing and a shorter duration of wound discharge without increasing the operating time.</p>","PeriodicalId":17346,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Korean Society of Coloproctology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3393/jksc.2012.28.2.78","citationCount":"55","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Korean Society of Coloproctology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3393/jksc.2012.28.2.78","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2012/4/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 55

Abstract

Purpose: This randomized clinical trial was conducted to compare a fistulectomy and a fistulotomy with marsupialization in the management of a simple anal fistula.

Methods: Forty patients with simple anal fistula were randomized into two groups. Fistulous tracts were managed by using a fistulectomy (group A) while a fistulotomy with marsupialization was performed in group B. The primary outcome measure was wound healing time while secondary outcome measures were operating time, postoperative wound size, postoperative pain, wound infection, anal incontinence, recurrence and patient satisfaction.

Results: Postoperative wounds in group B healed earlier in comparison to group A wounds (4.85 ± 1.39 weeks vs. 6.75 ± 1.83 weeks, P = 0.035). No significant differences existed between the operating times (28.00 ± 6.35 minutes vs. 28.20 ± 6.57 minutes, P = 0.925) and visual analogue scale scores for postoperative pain on the first postoperative day (4.05 ± 1.47 vs. 4.50 ± 1.32, P = 0.221) for the two groups. Postoperative wounds were larger in group A than in group B (2.07 ± 0.1.90 cm(2) vs. 1.23 ± 0.87 cm(2)), however this difference did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.192). Wound discharge was observed for a significantly longer duration in group A than in group B (4.10 ± 1.91 weeks vs. 2.75 ± 1.71 weeks, P = 0.035). There were no differences in social and sexual activities after surgery between the patients of the two groups. No patient developed anal incontinence or recurrence during the follow-up period of twelve weeks.

Conclusion: In comparison to a fistulectomy, a fistulotomy with marsupialization results in faster healing and a shorter duration of wound discharge without increasing the operating time.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
瘘管切除术与瘘管切开术加有袋化术治疗单纯性肛瘘的比较:一项随机对照试验。
目的:本随机临床试验旨在比较单纯性肛瘘的瘘管切除术和瘘管切开术加有袋化术。方法:将40例单纯性肛瘘患者随机分为两组。a组行瘘管切除术,b组行有袋造瘘术。主要观察指标为创面愈合时间,次要观察指标为手术时间、术后创面大小、术后疼痛、创面感染、肛门失禁、复发和患者满意度。结果:B组术后创面愈合较A组早(4.85±1.39周∶6.75±1.83周,P = 0.035)。两组手术时间(28.00±6.35 min vs 28.20±6.57 min, P = 0.925)和术后第1天疼痛视觉模拟评分(4.05±1.47 vs 4.50±1.32,P = 0.221)比较差异无统计学意义。A组术后创面大于B组(2.07±0.1.90 cm(2)∶1.23±0.87 cm(2)),但差异无统计学意义(P = 0.192)。a组创面排出时间明显长于B组(4.10±1.91周∶2.75±1.71周,P = 0.035)。两组患者术后社交和性活动无差异。随访12周,无患者发生肛门失禁或复发。结论:与瘘管切除术相比,有袋造瘘术愈合更快,伤口排出时间更短,且不增加手术时间。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy. Finding a new prognostic biomarker for metastatic colorectal cancer. Pelvic exenteration: surgical approaches. Association of immune status with recurrent anal condylomata in human immunodeficiency virus-positive patients. Analysis of risk factors for the development of incisional and parastomal hernias in patients after colorectal surgery.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1