What is the best method of rectovaginal fistula repair? A 25-year single-center experience.

BACKGROUND: The surgical treatment of rectovaginal fistula (RVF) remains challenging and there is a lack of data to demonstrate the best, single procedure. The aim of this study was to assess the results of different surgical operations for rectovaginal fistula. METHODS: Patients with RVF who underwent surgical repair between 1992 and 2017 at a single, tertiary care center were included. Twenty different procedures were performed including: primary closure, closure with sphincter repair, flap repairs, plug/fibrin/mesh repair, examination under anesthesia (EUA) ± seton placement, abdominal resections with and without diversion and ileostomy takedown, gracilis muscle transposition, fistulotomy/ligation of intersphincteric fistula tract. All patients with RVF due to diverticulitis and patients without complete data from paper charting were excluded. Success was defined based on the absence of symptoms related to RVF and absence of diverting stoma at 6 months. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-four women were analyzed. The median age was 45 (range 18-84) years. Median follow-up time from the last procedure was 6 months (range 0-203 months). The total number of patients considered successfully treated at the end of their treatment was 91 (91/124, 73.4%). When considering all procedures (n = 255), the success rate for flap procedures was 57.9% (22/38), followed by abdominal resections with and without proximal diversion and ileostomy takedown (16/29, 55.2%) and primary closure with sphincter repair (17/32, 53.1%) while fistula plug, and fibrin glue had among the lowest success rates (4/22, 18.2%). The highest success rate was observed among patients whose RVF etiology was due to malignancy (11/16, 68.8%) followed by unknown (8/14, 57%) and iatrogenic (21/48, 43.8%) causes. CONCLUSIONS: Local procedures such as mucosal flap or primary closure and sphincteroplasty are associated with a high success rate should be considered in patients with low-lying, simple RVF. Abdominal resections with and without proximal diversions and ileostomy takedown have a relatively high success rate in selected patients. The low success rate of fibrin glue and fistula plugs demonstrates their low efficacy in RVF; thus, these procedures should be avoided in the treatment algorithm.

Endorectal advancement flap for complex anal fistula: does flap configuration matter?

AIM: Treatment of complex anal fistula (CAF) is challenging, often requiring multiple operations due to a high failure rate. The plethora of options attests to the lack of a panacea. Endorectal advancement flap (ERAF) carries the advantages of no sphincter division, no contour defect to the anal canal and no perineal wound. The failure rate of this procedure ranges between 15% and 60%. Although the procedure traditionally described a rhomboid (tongue-shaped) flap, an elliptical (curvilinear) flap was introduced to try to improve the results. This study aimed to describe the elliptical-shaped ERAF performed by the senior authors and others and compare failure rates between elliptical and rhomboid ERAFs for CAF. METHOD: A retrospective review of all patients who underwent ERAF for CAF between 2011 and 2017 was undertaken. Patients were divided into two groups based on the type of flap: rhomboid or elliptical. The main outcomes measures were postoperative persistent or recurrent fistula. RESULTS: Seventy-six ERAF procedures for CAF were identified in 71 patients; 39 had a classic rhomboid flap and 37 had an elliptical configuration with mean follow-up of 13.8 and 13.9 months, respectively. The groups were similar for demographic parameters and preoperative fistula characteristics. The overall failure rate was 37%, with a success rate of 64% in the rhomboid and 62% in the elliptical group. CONCLUSION: The shape of the ERAF for treatment of CAF does not appear to influence failure rate.

Early outcomes of fluorescence angiography in the setting of endorectal mucosa advancement flaps.

BACKGROUND: Fistula-in-ano has a reported incidence of 31-34%. Besides fistulotomy, options for fistula repair are seton placement, endorectal advancement flap (ERAF), fibrin sealant, anal fistula plug and ligation of the intersphincteric fistula tract. Despite having a reported success rate as high as 75-98%, ERAF is not without complications, including flap breakdown, recurrence and fecal incontinence. Traditionally, maintaining a broad base to preserve blood supply has been advocated to reduce flap failure. And the aim of the present study was to evaluate outcomes of adult patients who underwent ERAF for complex fistula-in-ano with the use of intraoperative fluorescence angiography (FA) at our institution between July 2014 and July 2016. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed consecutive cases of complex fistula-in-ano repair with ERAF and FA from a prospectively maintained dataset of adult patients with complex fistula-in-ano. Demographics, intraoperative data and 60-day outcomes were recorded and reviewed. RESULTS: Six patients [five males and one female with a mean age of 40 years (range 25-46 years)], with a total of seven fistulas, were identified. Six (85.7%) of these patients had undergone prior surgery for fistula-in-ano. No recurrences or complications of any type were noted at 2-week and 8-week follow-up. The majority of patients (71.4%) required flap revision based on intraoperative FA prior to flap fixation. CONCLUSIONS: FA is safe and offers real-time assessment of flap perfusion prior to and after fixation in anal fistula repair. The rate of flap ischemia may be underestimated, and therefore, to improve outcomes in ERAF, intraoperative FA should be included in the surgical armamentarium.

Definitive seton management for transsphincteric fistula-in-ano: harm or charm?

AIM: The treatment of transsphincteric anal fistula requires a balance between eradication of the disease and preservation of faecal control. A cutting seton is an old tool that is now out of vogue for many surgeons. We hypothesized that the concept remains reliable and safe with results that exceed those reported for many of the more recently described methods. METHOD: A retrospective review was conducted of real-time electronic health records (single institution, single surgeon) of patients presenting during the 14 years between 2001 and 2014 with a transsphincteric anal fistula who were treated with a cutting seton. Excluded were patients with Crohn's disease, fistulae related to malignancy or a previous anastomosis and patients whose fistula was treated by another method including a loose draining seton. Data collection included demographics, duration of the disease, duration of the treatment, outcome and continence. RESULTS: In all, 121 patients (80 men) of mean age 40.2 ± 12.2 years (range 18-76) with a mean follow-up of 5.1 ± 3.3 (1-24) months were included in the analysis. The median duration of symptoms was 6 (1-84) months; 36% had failed other fistula surgery, 12% had a complex fistula with more than one track and 35% had some form of comorbidity. The median time to healing was 3 (1-18) months; 7.4% required further surgery, but eventually 98% had complete fistula healing. The incontinence rate decreased postoperatively to 11.6% from 19% before treatment with 17/121 with pre-existing incontinence resolved and 8/107 new cases developing. CONCLUSION: Despite its retrospective non-comparative design, the study has demonstrated that a cutting seton is a safe, well tolerated and highly successful treatment for transsphincteric anal fistula and is followed overall by improved continence. The results compare very favourably with other techniques.

An outcome and cost analysis of anal fistula plug insertion vs endorectal advancement flap for complex anal fistulae.

AIM: The study aimed to compare the rate of success and cost of anal fistula plug (AFP) insertion and endorectal advancement flap (ERAF) for anal fistula. METHOD: Patients receiving an AFP or ERAF for a complex single fistula tract, defined as involving more than a third of the longitudinal length of of the anal sphincter, were registered in a prospective database. A regression analysis was performed of factors predicting recurrence and contributing to cost. RESULTS: Seventy-one patients (AFP 31, ERAF 40) were analysed. Twelve (39%) recurrences occurred in the AFP and 17 (43%) in the ERAF group (P = 1.00). The median length of stay was 1.23 and 2.0 days (P < 0.001), respectively, and the mean cost of treatment was €5439 ± €2629 and €7957 ± €5905 (P = 0.021), respectively. On multivariable analysis, postoperative complications, underlying inflammatory bowel disease and fistula recurring after previous treatment were independent predictors of de novo recurrence. It also showed that length of hospital stay ≤ 1 day to be the most significant independent contributor to lower cost (P = 0.023). CONCLUSION: Anal fistula plug and ERAF were equally effective in treating fistula-in-ano, but AFP has a mean cost saving of €2518 per procedure compared with ERAF. The higher cost for ERAF is due to a longer median length of stay.

Anal Cryptoglandular Suppuration: Evidence-Based Management.

Anal suppurative processes are commonly encountered in surgical practice. While the initial therapeutic intervention is philosophically straightforward (incision and drainage), drainage of the appropriate space and treatment of the subsequent fistula in ano require a thorough understanding of perianal anatomy and nuanced decision making. Balancing the risk of fecal incontinence with simple fistulotomy versus the higher risk of fistula recurrence with all sphincter-sparing fistula treatments can be a challenge for surgeons and patients alike.

Surgery of Simple and Complex Anal Fistulae in Adults: A Review of the Literature for Optimal Surgical Outcomes.

Anal fistulas are common anorectal conditions, and surgery is the primary treatment option. In the last 20 years of literature, there exist a large number of surgical procedures, especially for the treatment of complex anal fistulas, as they present more recurrences and continence problems than simple anal fistulas. To date, there are no guidelines for choosing the best technique. We conducted a recent literature review, mainly the last 20 years, based on the PubMed and Google Scholar medical databases, with the goal of identifying the surgical procedures with the highest success rates, lowest recurrence rates, and best safety profiles. Clinical trials, retrospective studies, review articles, comparative studies, recent systematic reviews, and meta-analyses for various surgical techniques, as well as the latest guidelines of the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons, the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, and the German S3 guidelines on simple and complex fistulas were reviewed. According to the literature, there is no recommendation for the optimal surgical technique. The etiology, complexity, and many other factors affect the outcome. In simple intersphincteric anal fistulas, fistulotomy is the procedure of choice. In simple low transsphincteric fistulas, the patient's selection is crucial in order to perform a safe fistulotomy or another sphincter-saving technique. The healing rate in simple anal fistulas is higher than 95% with low recurrence and without significant postoperative complications. In complex anal fistulas, only sphincter-saving techniques should be used; the optimal outcomes are obtained by the ligation of the intersphincteric fistulous tract (LIFT) and rectal advancement flaps. Those techniques assure high healing rates of 60-90%. The novel technique of the transanal opening of the intersphincteric space (TROPIS) is under evaluation. The novel sphincter-saving techniques of fistula laser closure (FiLac) and video-assisted anal fistula treatment (VAAFT) are safe, with reported healing rates ranging from 65% to 90%. Surgeons should be familiar with all sphincter-saving techniques in order to face the variability of the fistulas-in-ano. Currently, there is no universally superior technique that can treat all fistulas.

A Comparison of Different Surgical Treatments for Complex Anal Fistula: A Systematic Review.

Fistula-in-ano is a common proctological condition that primarily affects younger people and leads to chronic morbidity. An anal fistula is divided into simple and complex fistulas. A complex fistula is a challenging problem due to higher recurrence rates and incontinence associated with surgery. Many new methods have been developed for the closure of complex fistula-in-ano, but there is no single best method. The aim of this study is to identify a superior surgical technique for treating complex/high cryptoglandular perianal fistulas (HCPFs). A literature search was done using PubMed and Google Scholar for the period of 2012-2021. Articles that contain surgical treatment for complex anal fistula in the English language published in the last 10 years were included. The types of studies included were randomized controlled trials (RCTs), meta-analyses, systematic reviews, cohort studies, and traditional reviews. Articles excluded were those done more than 10 years ago, in other languages, and containing simple fistula management only. Nine studies were included in the review; a systematic review and meta-analysis concluded that no single method is effective. The ligation of the intersphincteric fistula tract (LIFT) procedure seems to be a promising and effective technique as it has a low rate of fecal incontinence as compared to other methods. Biological techniques give variable success rates so does fistula plug (FP). Mucosal advancement flap (MAF) and rerouting seton give good results according to one study. Fistula plug gives variable results and is not a preferred method. Ligation of the intersphincteric fistula tract (LIFT) seems to be a promising new technique for complex anal fistulas, but the data available is not enough to determine the best method. More randomized trials are required to compare traditional techniques and emerging new biological methods to see the best technique available.

Endorectal Advancement Flap With Muscular Plication in Anovaginal and Anterior Perineal Fistulas.

PURPOSE: Endorectal mucosal advancement flap with muscular plication can ensure complete closure of anovaginal fistulas and preserve continence. The aim of this retrospective study was to show indications might be broadened to include anoperineal fistulas. METHODS: This retrospective study gathered all available data from patients with anovaginal or anterior perineal fistulas who underwent transanal advancement flap repair with muscular plication. A loose seton was passed in the fistula track prior to surgery in all patients. Fistula healing was defined as fistula closure during proctological examination associated with complete resolution of symptoms. RESULTS: Thirty-five patients were included from January 2011 to March 2017. Causes of fistula were various, mostly post-operative (34.3%, n = 12), obstetrical (17.1%, n = 6) and inflammatory (14.3%, n = 5). Success rate was 65.2%. Fistula healing was obtained in 60.0% of patients with Crohn disease in remission. Closure rate was higher in anterior perineal fistulas (89.0%) than in anovaginal fistulas (63.6%) even if it did not reach statistical significance. Slight fecal continence disorders were noted in 2 women (5.7%). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the efficacy of transanal advancement flap repair with muscular plication for anovaginal and anterior perineal fistulas. Similar closure rates and smaller postoperative incontinence rates compared to the classical technique make this surgery an optimal solution whose efficacy appears to be sustainable over time.

Autologous adipose-derived stem cells for the treatment of complex cryptoglandular perianal fistula: a prospective case-control study.

BACKGROUND: Complex cryptoglandular perianal fistula (CPAF) is a kind of anal fistula that may cause anal incontinence after surgery. Minimally invasive surgery of anal fistula is constantly emerging. Over the past 20 years, there are several sphincter-sparing surgeries, one of which is autologous adipose-derived stem cell (ADSC) transplantation. However, to date, there is no study regarding the treatment of complex CPAF with ADSC in China. This is the first study in China on the treatment of complex CPAF with ADSC to evaluate its safety and efficacy. METHODS: Totally, 24 patients with complex CPAF were enrolled in this prospective case-control study from January 2018 to December 2019 in the National Colorectal Disease Center of Nanjing Hospital of Chinese Medicine Affiliated to Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine. Patients were divided into ADSC group and endorectal advancement flap (ERAF) group according to their desire. The healing of fistulas (healing of all treated fistulas at baseline, confirmed by doctor's clinical assessment and magnetic resonance imaging or transrectal ultrasonography) was evaluated at week 12 after treatment. In addition to their safety evaluation based on adverse events monitored at each follow-up, the patients were also asked to complete some scoring scales at each follow-up including pain score with visual analog score (VAS) and anal incontinence score with Wexner score. RESULTS: The closure rates within ADSC group and ERAF group at week 12 were 54.55% (6/11) and 53.85% (7/13), respectively, without significant difference between them. VAS score in ADSC group was significantly lower than that in ERAF group at the 5th day postoperatively [1(0,2) VS 2(2,4), p = 0.011], but no differences were observed at the other time. Wexner score of all patients was not increased with no significant differences between the two groups. Adverse events were observed fewer in ADSC group (27.27%) than that in ERAF group (53.85%), but there was no significant difference between them. CONCLUSION: This study indicated safety and efficiency of ADSC for the treatment of complex CPAF in the short term, which is not inferior to that of ERAF. ADSC may provide a promised and potential treatment for complex CPAF conforming to the future of the treatment, which is reconstruction and regeneration. TRAIL REGISTRATION: ChiCTR, ChiCTR1800014599. Registered 23 January 2018-retrospectively registered, http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=24548.

Predictors of long-term healing for endorectal advancement flap for anorectal fistulas

Introduction: Anorectal fistulas are some of the commonest surgical proctologic disorders treated by surgeons. Despite the recent introduction of various sphincter preserving techniques, the search for the optimal operation continues. The purpose of this study was to determine the predictors of long-term healing for the endorectal advancement flap. Methods: A retrospective review of a single surgeon experience with the endorectal advancement flap for anorectal fistulas over an 18-year period. The impact of various patient and fistula related factors were analyzed for their impact on the primary endpoint of long-term fistula healing. Results: 87 patients underwent endorectal advancement flap (Male/Female 42.5/57.5%). Median age was 41 years. Sixty-nine patients (79.3%) had anal fistula while 18 patients had rectal fistula (20.7%). An anterior based fistula was noted in 45 patients (51.7%). The most common etiology was cryptoglandular disease (87.4%). The median operative time was 75minutes (range 36-250). Postoperative septic complications were noted in 4 patients (4.6%). Fistula healing was documented in 80 patients (93%). During a median follow-up of 4 months (range 1-38, 1 patient lost to follow-up), recurrence was noted in 8 patients (9.3%), yielding an overall long-term success rate of 83.7%. The long-term healing rate was higher in patients with fistulas from cryptoglandular etiology (86.6%) compared to fistulas from other etiologies (63.6%) [p = 0.027]. Conclusions: The endorectal advancement is associated with a high healing rate, a low postoperative septic complication rate, and infrequent risk for recurrence. Long-term healing without recurrence is achieved more frequently in patients with cryptoglandular etiology of the fistula compared to patients with non-cryptoglandular etiology. (AU)

Perianal Fistulas in Patients With Crohn's Disease, Part 2: Surgical, Endoscopic, and Future Therapies.

The treatment of perianal fistulas remains a clinical challenge despite the significant advances that have been made in the management of luminal inflammatory bowel disease. In combination with medical therapies, surgical management of perianal fistulas is important for both infection control and definitive repair. Older surgical techniques include the placement of draining and cutting setons and endorectal advancement flaps. Newer surgical techniques that utilize lasers and video-assisted technology are being studied to help patients with chronic, refractory perianal fistulas. In addition to surgical management, less-invasive endoscopic techniques, including endoscopic fistulotomy and endoscopic clipping, are being investigated. Looking forward, allogeneic and autologous adult mesenchymal stem cells are being evaluated to induce fistula healing and improve rates of fistula closure. Here, in the second of a 2-part series on perianal fistulas in patients with Crohn's disease, we discuss the current surgical management of perianal fistulas as well as newer endoscopic techniques and future therapies.

Successful management of rectovaginal fistula treated by endorectal advancement flap: report of two cases and literature review.

INTRODUCTION: Rectovaginal fistula (RVF) sometimes has a difficulty in treatment. This report describes two patients who suffered from RVF. CASE DESCRIPTIONS: One patient was a 76-year-old woman who had a RVF over 30 years after the 3rd childbirth. She underwent endorectal advancement flap (ERAF). She had a nighttime soiling after ERAF once a month, which disappeared one year after surgery. Second patient was a 23-year-old woman who had a RVF one month after the first childbirth. She underwent ERAF, and did not have any complications. DISCUSSION AND EVALUATION: Both patients did not develop recurrence for four years. Quality of life after ERAF was satisfactory in both patients. ERAF is a safe procedure in terms of both short and long outcomes. We also present a review of the literature concerning ERAF for RVF. CONCLUSIONS: ERAF can be a potential option as a treatment for RVF.

Anal abscess and fistula.

Benign anorectal diseases, such as anal abscesses and fistula, are commonly seen by primary care physicians, gastroenterologists, emergency physicians, general surgeons, and colorectal surgeons. It is important to have a thorough understanding of the complexity of these 2 disease processes so as to provide appropriate and timely treatment. We review the pathophysiology, presentation, diagnosis, and treatment options for both anal abscesses and fistulas.

Fístula rectovaginal posobstétrica: tratamiento quirúrgico mediante avance de colgajo endorrectal / Postobstetric rectovaginal fistula: surgical treatment using endorectal advancement flap

Introducción: Las fístulas rectovaginales ocurren con una frecuencia menor a 5 % respecto a otros tipos de fístulas de la región anorrectal; el trauma obstétrico es la causa más común de este tipo de fístulas. Existen diversos procedimientos quirúrgicos para la reparación de las mismas. Material y métodos: Se realizó un estudio de 16 pacientes con diagnóstico de fístula rectovaginal posobtétrica, atendidas en el Hospital Juárez de México entre enero de 1992 y diciembre de 2006. Se analizó edad de las pacientes, tipo de trauma obstétrico, tiempo de inicio de la sintomatología después del parto, localización y tamaño de la fístula, índice de éxito y recidivas mediante el tratamiento con avance de colgajo endorrectal, y necesidad de esfinteroplastia complementaria. Resultados: La edad promedio fue de 25.6 años. En todas las pacientes, la sintomatología inició después de un parto vaginal durante el cual se realizó episiotomía o hubo desgarro perineal. Todas las fístulas fueron menores de 2.5 cm de diámetro y de localización baja. Con el colon preparado, en todas las pacientes se reparó la fístula rectovaginal mediante avance de colgajo endorrectal. En dos pacientes se llevó acabo, además, esfinteroplastia del esfínter anal. Los resultados fueron satisfactorios en 15 pacientes (93.7 %); no hubo mortalidad operatoria y no fueron utilizados estomas de protección. Conclusiones: El colgajo endorrectal es un procedimiento seguro para la reparación de fístulas rectovaginales de origen posobstétrico, algunos casos pueden requerir esfinteroplastia del esfínter anal.

BACKGROUND: Rectovaginal fistulas account for <5% of all rectal fistulas. Obstetrical injuries are the most common cause of these types of fistulas. There have been a multitude of surgical approaches developed for operative repair. METHODS: Between January 1992 and December 2006, 16 patients with postobstetric rectovaginal fistula were treated at the Hospital Juárez of México. Age, type of obstetric trauma, time elapsed between delivery and beginning of symptoms, location, and size of the fistulas, rate of success and recurrence with the use of endorectal flap, and need for complementary sphincteroplasty were all evaluated. RESULTS: Median age of the patients was 25.6 years. All women reported that their symptoms began after a vaginal delivery that included an episiotomy or 4th degree laceration. All fistulas were low and small (<2.5 cm in diameter). Patients received bowel preparation and underwent rectovaginal repair using endorectal advancement flap. In two cases, additional overlap repair of the anal sphincter was performed. Result of repair was good to excellent in 15 patients (93.7%). There were no operative mortalities, and no covering stomas were used. CONCLUSIONS: Endorectal flap repair provides successful postobstetric rectovaginal fistula closure. Concomitant sphincteroplasty may be necessary in some cases.