The Optimal Primary Treatment for Pediatric Perianal Abscess and Anal Fistula: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Perianal abscesses and anal fistulas are common. The principle of intention-to-treat has not been considered in previous systemic reviews. Thus, the comparison between primary and post-recurrence management was confused, and the recommendation of primary treatment is obscure. The current study aims to identify the optimal initial treatment for pediatric patients. METHODS: Using PRISMA guidelines, studies were identified from MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar without any language or study design restriction. The inclusion criteria include original articles or articles with original data, studies of management for a perianal abscess with or without anal fistula, and patient age of <18 years. Patients with local malignancy, Crohn's disease, or other underlying predisposing conditions were excluded. Studies without analyzing recurrence, case series of <5, and irrelevant articles were excluded in the screening stage. Of the 124 screened articles, 14 articles had no full texts or detailed information. Articles written in a language other than English or Mandarin were translated by Google Translation first and confirmed with native speakers. After the eligibility process, studies that compared identified primary managements were then included in the qualitative synthesis. RESULTS: Thirty-one studies involving 2507 pediatric patients met the inclusion criteria. The study design consisted of two prospective case series of 47 patients and retrospective cohort studies. No randomized control trials were identified. Meta-analyses for recurrence after initial management were performed with a random-effects model. Conservative treatment and drainage revealed no difference (Odds ratio [OR], 1.222; 95% Confidential interval [CI]: 0.615-2.427, p = 0.567). Conservative management had a higher risk of recurrence than surgery without statistical significance (OR 0.278, 95% CI: 0.109-0.707, p = 0.007). Compared with incision/drainage, surgery can prevent recurrence remarkably (OR 4.360, 95% CI: 1.761-10.792, p = 0.001). Subgroup analysis of different approaches within conservative treatment and operation was not performed for lacking information. CONCLUSION: Strong recommendations cannot be made due to the lack of prospective or randomized controlled studies. However, the current study based on real primary management supports initial surgical intervention for pediatric patients with perianal abscesses and anal fistula to prevent recurrence. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Type of study: Systemic review; Evidence level: Level II.

Does adjuvant antibiotic treatment after drainage of anorectal abscess prevent development of anal fistulas? A randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: The risk of fistula formation is a major concern after incision and drainage of an anorectal abscess. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to the test the effects of antibiotic treatment on fistula formation after incision and drainage of anorectal abscesses. DESIGN: Randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study. SETTING: Multicenter trial at 3 teaching hospitals in Turkey. PATIENTS: Patients who underwent abscess drainage between September 2005 and January 2008 were evaluated for eligibility. Exclusion criteria included penicillin allergy, antimicrobial agent usage before enrolment, other infection, previous anorectal surgery, inflammatory bowel disease, suspicion of Fournier gangrene, secondary and recurrent anorectal abscesses, anal fistula at time of the surgery, immune compromised states, and pregnancy. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomly assigned to receive placebo or amoxicillin-clavulanic acid combination treatment for 10 days after abscess drainage. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary end point was rate of anorectal fistula formation at 1-year follow-up. RESULTS: : Of 334 patients assessed for eligibility, 183 entered the study (placebo, 92; antibiotics, 91). Data were available for per-protocol analysis from 151 patients (placebo, 76; antibiotics, 75) with a mean age of 37.6 years; 118 patients (78.1%) were men. Overall, 45 patients (29.8%) developed anal fistulas during 1-year follow-up. Fistula formation occurred in 17 patients (22.4%) in the placebo group and in 28 patients (37.3%) in the antibiotic group (P = .044). Risk of fistula formation was increased in patients with ischiorectal abscess (odds ratio, 7.82) or intersphincteric abscess (odds ratio, 3.35) compared with perianal abscess. CONCLUSION: Antibiotic treatment following the drainage of an anorectal abscess has no protective effect regarding risk of fistula formation.

Pain level and anal discomfort during transrectal ultrasound for guided prostate biopsy. Does intrarectal administration of local anesthetic before periprostatic anesthesia makes any difference?

AIM: The aim of this study was to evaluate the anal discomfort and pain level, during transrectal ultrasound probe insertion and before the periprostatic anesthesia in young patients (<65 years of age). METHODS: This study enrolled 147 patients, who underwent prostate biopsy and were divided in two groups: 74 patients received perianal local anesthesia with lidocaine cream 2% (first group), while 73 received only lubricant gel as perianal local anesthesia (second group) prior the insertion of ultrasound probe. Patients in both groups received periprostatic anesthesia. Pain and discomfort due to the probe and due to the biopsy were estimated with visual analogue scale. Patients' characteristics, complications, and surgical data were analyzed for both groups. RESULTS: No serious intraoperative and postoperative complications were noted in both groups. The mean pain score for pain and anal discomfort was 1.7 and 5.7 for the first and second group, respectively. During biopsy, patients in the first group reported also less pain but there was no significant difference. CONCLUSIONS: The intrarectal introduction of lidocaine cream 2% can significantly reduce anal discomfort and pain before the probe insertion for ultrasound guided biopsies in young patients. Considering that these patients could undergo repeated biopsies, a higher level of local anesthesia is desired.