Sclerotherapy for hemorrhoidal disease: systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of sclerotherapy methods for hemorrhoidal disease (HD) over the past 40 years. METHODS: The review followed the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A comprehensive literature search was conducted, including studies reporting the use of sclerotherapy in patients with HD. Study eligibility criteria were defined, and data were extracted independently by the authors. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed to assess outcomes of interest. RESULTS: Out of 1965 records identified, 44 studies met the inclusion criteria, involving 9729 patients. The majority of studies were conducted in Japan, followed by the UK, Italy, and Portugal. The median age of participants was 52 years, and the majority were male. The Goligher grade distribution indicated varying degrees of HD severity. Sclerotherapy was predominantly administered through anoscopy, with polidocanol being the most commonly used agent. The procedure was generally performed without pre-injection analgesia. The meta-analysis of 14 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) revealed that sclerotherapy was not inferior to control interventions in terms of success rate (risk ratio [RR] 1.00, 95% CI 0.71-1.41) and recurrence rate (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.69-1.77), while resulting in fewer complications (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.23-0.92). CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review highlights the safety and efficacy of sclerotherapy for HD, which yields similar success rates and fewer complications compared to other conservative or surgical approaches. Further research is warranted to optimize sclerotherapy techniques and evaluate long-term outcomes. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO 2023 CRD42023396910.

Time trend in the surgical management of obstructed defecation syndrome: a multicenter experience on behalf of the Italian Society of Colorectal Surgery (SICCR).

BACKGROUND: Surgical management of obstructed defecation syndrome (ODS) is challenging, with several surgical options showing inconsistent functional results over time. The aim of this study was to evaluate the trend in surgical management of ODS in a 10-year timeframe across Italian referral centers. METHODS: Surgeons from referral centers for the management of pelvic floor disorders and affiliated to the Italian Society of Colorectal Surgery provided data on the yearly volume of procedures for ODS from 2010 to 2019. Six common clinical scenarios of ODS were captured, including details on patient's anal sphincter function and presence of rectocele and/or rectal intussusception. Perineal repair, ventral rectopexy (VRP), transanal repair (internal Delorme), stapled transanal rectal resection (STARR), Contour Transtar, and transvaginal repair were considered in each clinical scenario. RESULTS: Twenty-five centers were included providing data on 2943 surgical patients. Procedure volumes ranged from 10-20 (54%) to 21-50 (46%) per year across centers. The most performed techniques in patients with good sphincter function were transanal repair for isolated rectocele (243/716 [34%]), transanal repair for isolated rectal intussusception (287/677 [42%]) and VRP for combined abnormalities (464/976 [48%]). When considering poor sphincter function, these were perineal repair (112/194 [57.8%]) for isolated rectocele, and VRP for the other two scenarios (60/120 [50%] and 97/260 [37%], respectively). The use of STARR and Contour Transtar decreased over time in patients with impaired sphincter function. CONCLUSIONS: The complexity of ODS treatment is confirmed by the variety of clinical scenarios that can occur and by the changing trend of surgical management over the last 10 years.

Stepped-wedge randomized controlled trial of laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy in adults with chronic constipation.

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy (LVMR) in patients with defecatory disorders secondary to internal rectal prolapse is poorly evidenced. A UK-based multicenter randomized controlled trial was designed to determine the clinical efficacy of LVMR compared to controls at medium-term follow-up. METHODS: The randomized controlled trial was conducted from March 1, 2015 TO January 31, 2019. A stepped-wedge RCT design permitted observer-masked data comparisons between patients awaiting LVMR (controls) with those who had undergone surgery. Adult participants with radiologically confirmed IRP refractory to conservative treatment were randomized to three arms with different delays before surgery. Efficacy outcome data were collected at equally stepped time points (12, 24, 36, 48, 60, and 72 weeks). Clinical efficacy of LVMR compared to controls was defined as ≥ 1.0-point reduction in Patient Assessment of Constipation-Quality of Life and/or Symptoms (PAC-QOL and/or PAC-SYM) scores at 24 weeks. Secondary outcome measures included 14-day diary data, the Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale (GAD-7), the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), St Marks incontinence score, the Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire (PISQ-12), the chronic constipation Behavioral Response to Illness Questionnaire (CC-BRQ), and the Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire (BIPQ). RESULTS: Of a calculated sample size of 114, only 28 patients (100% female) were randomized from 6 institutions (due mainly to national pause on mesh-related surgery). Nine were assigned to the T0 arm, 10 to T12, and 9 to T24. There were no substantial differences in baseline characteristics between the three arms. Compared to baseline, significant reduction (improvement) in PAC-QOL and PAC-SYM scores were observed at 24 weeks post-surgery (- 1.09 [95% CI - 1.76, - 0.41], p = 0.0019, and - 0.92 [- 1.52, - 0.32], p = 0.0029, respectively) in the 19 patients available for analysis (9 were excluded for dropout [n = 2] or missing primary outcome [n = 7]). There was a clinically significant long-term reduction in PAC-QOL scores (- 1.38 [- 2.94, 0.19], p = 0.0840 at 72 weeks). Statistically significant improvements in PAC-SYM scores persisted to 72 weeks (- 1.51 [- 2.87, - 0.16], p = 0.0289). Compared to baseline, no differences were found in secondary outcomes, except for significant improvements at 24 and 48 weeks on CC-BRQ avoidance behavior (- 14.3 [95% CI - 23.3, - 5.4], and - 0.92 [- 1.52, - 0.32], respectively), CC-BRQ safety behavior (- 13.7 [95% CI - 20.5, - 7.0], and - 13.0 [- 19.8, - 6.1], respectively), and BIPQ negative perceptions (- 16.3 [95% CI - 23.5, - 9.0], and - 10.5 [- 17.9, - 3.2], respectively). CONCLUSIONS: With the caveat of under-powering due to poor recruitment, the study presents the first randomized trial evidence of short-term benefit of LVMR for internal rectal prolapse. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN Registry (ISRCTN11747152).

Is the Goligher classification a valid tool in clinical practice and research for hemorrhoidal disease?

BACKGROUND: The most widely used classification for hemorrhoidal disease (HD) is the Goligher classification, which ranks presence and severity of prolapse in four grades. Since physicians base this gradation on medical history and physical examination, it might be prone to interobserver variability. Furthermore, the gradation impacts the treatment of choice which makes reproducibility of utmost importance. The aim of this study was to determine the interobserver variability of Goligher classification among surgeons in the Netherlands. METHODS: A single-choice survey was used. The first part consisted of questions concerning baseline characteristics and the use of the Goligher classification in routine clinical practice. In the second part, to assess interobserver variability, we asked gastrointestinal surgeons and residents who routinely treat HD to review 25 photographs (with given timing as during rest or push) of patients with HD and classify the gradation using the Goligher classification. The survey was sent by email on April 19, 2021 and was available online until July 5, 2021. Interobserver variability was assessed using Fleiss' Kappa test. RESULTS: A total of 329 gastrointestinal surgeons, fellows and residents were sent an invitation email, of whom 95 (29%) completed the survey. Among the respondents, 87% indicated that they use the Goligher classification in clinical practice. Eighty-one percent found the classification helpful and 63% classified HD according to Goligher and followed the guidelines for treatment of HD accordingly. The interobserver variability showed an overall fair strength of agreement, with a Fleiss' Kappa (κ) of 0.376 (95% CI 0.373-0.380). There was a moderate agreement for grade I and IV HD with a κ statistic of 0.466 and 0.522, respectively. For grades II and III, there was a lower (fair) strength of agreement with 0.206 and 0.378, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The fair interobserver variability is disappointing and demonstrates the need for a more reliable, and internationally accepted, classification for HD. A new classification should enable more uniformity in treating HD and in comparing outcomes of future trials and prospective registries. The protocol for a Delphi study for a new classification system is currently being prepared and led by an international research group.

Heterogeneity in outcome selection, definition and measurement in studies assessing the treatment of cryptoglandular anal fistula: findings from a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Treatment for cryptoglandular anal fistula (AF) is challenging and a lack of uniform outcomes in the literature prevents direct comparison of treatments. This can be addressed by developing a core outcome set, a standardised set of outcomes reported in all interventional studies for a specific condition. The aim of this systematic review is to assess the range of outcomes, their definitions, and the measurement instruments currently utilised in interventional studies for adult patients with AF. This will inform the development of an AF core outcome set. METHODS: Medline, Embase and The Cochrane Library were searched to identify all patient- and clinician-reported outcomes in studies assessing medical, surgical or combination treatment of adult patients with AF published from January 2008 to May 2020. The resulting outcomes were categorized according to the Core Outcome Measurement in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) taxonomy to better understand their distribution. RESULTS: In total, 155 studies were included, 552 outcomes were extracted, with a median of three outcomes (interquartile range 2-5) per study. Only 25% of studies demonstrated high-quality outcome reporting. The outcomes were merged into 52 unique outcomes and structured into four core areas and 14 domains, with the majority in the domain of physiological or clinical (gastrointestinal) outcomes. The most commonly reported outcomes were healing (77%), incontinence (63%), and recurrence (40%), with no single outcome assessed across all studies. There was a wide variation in outcome definitions and measurement instruments used. CONCLUSIONS: There is substantial heterogeneity in outcomes, definitions, and measurement instruments reported in interventional studies for cryptoglandular anal fistula. This emphasises the need for standardised outcome reporting and measurement.

Magnetic resonance imaging template to standardize reporting of anal fistulas.

Anal fistula (AF) is a common referral to colorectal surgeons. Management remains challenging and sometimes controversial. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is commonly performed in initial workup for AF. However, reports often lack key information for guiding treatment strategies. It has been shown that with structured radiology reports, there is less missing information. We present a structured MRI template report including 8 key descriptors of anal fistulas, whose effectiveness and acceptability are being assessed in a cross-sectional study (NCT04541238).

Preventing transmission among operating room staff during COVID-19 pandemic: the role of the Aerosol Box and other personal protective equipment.

The COVID-19 pandemic is highly challenging for the operating room staff and healthcare workers in emergency departments. SARS-CoV-2 is a positive-sense single-stranded RNA beta-coronavirus that primarily targets the human respiratory system, with fever, cough, myalgia, and pneumonia as the most common manifestations. However, since SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected in stool specimens much more attention has been paid to gastrointestinal symptoms such as loss of appetite, nausea, and diarrhea. Furthermore, the expression of ACE-2 receptors in absorptive enterocytes from ileum and colon suggests that these organs should also be considered as a potential high risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection. During aerosol-generating medical procedures (AGMP; e.g. intubating and extubating patients or any surgical procedures), the production of both airborne particles and droplets may increase the risk of infection. In this situation, the surgical staff is strongly recommended to wear personal protective equipment (PPE). A transparent plastic cube, the so-called "Aerosol Box" (AB), has been recently designed to lend further protection against droplets and aerosol exposure during the AGMP.

The development of a cryptoglandular Anal Fistula Core Outcome Set (AFCOS): an international Delphi study protocol.

PURPOSE: Cryptoglandular anal fistula is a disorder with an incidence of around 1 per 5,000 people per year in European countries. Many studies have been conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions for anal fistula. However, there is considerable heterogeneity in the outcomes assessed and reported in these studies. This limits research quality and complicates evidence synthesis. A solution for heterogeneity in outcome reporting is the development of a Core Outcome Set (COS). This paper describes the protocol for the development of a European COS for Anal Fistula (AFCOS). METHODS: The first step will be a systematic review of the literature to identify potential outcomes that may be included in the COS. Patient interviews will be conducted in The United Kingdom and The Netherlands to ensure that both clinician-important and patient-important outcomes are captured. The outcomes will be categorized using the COMET taxonomy and taken forward to a Delphi consensus exercise. In up to three web-based Delphi surveys the outcomes will be prioritized by patients, clinicians (surgeons, gastroenterologists, and radiologists), and (clinical) researchers. The responses will be summarized and reported anonymously in subsequent round(s) facilitating convergence to a consensus opinion. The final COS will be decided during a face-to-face consensus meeting with patients, clinicians, and (clinical) researchers. DISCUSSION: This study protocol describes the development of a European COS for anal fistula to improve research quality, evidence synthesis, and patient care.

Fistulotomy and primary sphincteroplasty for anal fistula: long-term data on continence and patient satisfaction.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and long-term efficacy of fistulotomy and primary sphincteroplasty (FIPS). Secondary endpoints were its impact on postoperative continence status and patients' satisfaction. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted on patients with cryptoglandular anal fistula (AF) who had FIPS between June 2006 and May 2017. Patients were evaluated with standardized telephone interviews and clinical/instrumental assessment. Main outcome measures included fistula healing rate, continence status, and patient satisfaction. Incontinence was defined as an inability to hold either gas, liquid, or solid stools, as well as postdefecation soiling, and was measured by the Cleveland Clinic fecal incontinence score. Patient satisfaction was evaluated by an 11-point numeric rating scale. RESULTS: There were 203 patients (139 males; mean age: 48.7 years) who had FIPS. The overall healing rate was 93% (188 patients) with a mean follow-up period of 56 ± 31 months. Half of the total cohort (51%) had a complex fistula. Preoperatively, 8 (4%) patients complained of postdefecation soiling and 2 (1%) of gas incontinence. Postoperatively, 26 (13%) patients had continence impairment (de novo n = 24), mainly consisting of postdefecation soiling (10%). In univariate analysis, patients with recurrent (RR 6.153 95% CI 2.097-18.048; p = 0.002) or complex (RR 3.005 95% CI 1.203-7.506; p = 0.012) AF and those with secondary tracts (RR 8.190 95% CI 2.188-30.654; p = 0.004) or previous set on drainage (RR 5.286 95% CI 2.235-12.503; p = 0.0001) were at higher risk of incontinence. In multivariate analysis, no significant predictors were found, although fistula complexity approached statistical significance (RR 5.464 95% CI 0.944-31.623; p = 0.050). The mean patient satisfaction numeric rating scale was 9.3 ± 1.6. Lower satisfaction rates were found in patients with transphincteric (p = 0.011) or complex (p = 0.0001) AF, with secondary tracts (p = 0.041) or previous seton drainage (p = 0.008), and in those with postoperative continence impairment (p = 0.0001). Postoperative onset of incontinence was the only significant factor in multivariate analysis (p = 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: FIPS should be considered a valid therapeutic option for selected AF. However, the risk of postoperative minor fecal incontinence exists, and should be discussed during preoperative patient counselling.

Contemporary surgical practice in the management of anal fistula: results from an international survey.

BACKGROUND: Management of anal fistula (AF) remains challenging with many controversies. The purpose of this study was to explore current surgical practice in the management of AF with a focus on technical variations among surgeons. METHODS: An online survey was conducted by inviting all surgeons and physicians on the membership directory of European Society of Coloproctology and American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons. An invitation was extended to others via social media. The survey had 74 questions exploring diagnostic and surgical techniques. RESULTS: In March 2018, 3572 physicians on membership directory were invited to take part in the study 510 of whom (14%) responded to the survey. Of these respondents, 492 (96%) were surgeons. Respondents were mostly colorectal surgeons (84%) at consultant level (84%), age ≥ 40 years (64%), practicing in academic (53%) or teaching (30%) hospitals, from the USA (36%) and Europe (34%). About 80% considered fistulotomy as the gold standard treatment for simple fistulas. Endorectal advancement flap was performed using partial- (42%) or full-thickness (44%) flaps. Up to 38% of surgeons performed ligation of the intersphincteric fistula tract (LIFT) sometimes with technical variations. Geographic and demographic differences were found in both the diagnostic and therapeutic approaches to AF. Declared rates of recurrence and fecal incontinence with these techniques were variable and did not correlate with surgeons' experience. Only 1-4% of surgeons were confident in performing the most novel sphincter-preserving techniques in patients with Crohn's disease. CONCLUSIONS: Profound technical variations exist in surgical management of AF, making it difficult to reproduce and compare treatment outcomes among different centers.

Surgery for constipation: systematic review and practice recommendations: Results I: Colonic resection.

AIM: To assess the outcomes of colectomy in adults with chronic constipation (CC). METHOD: Standardised methods and reporting of benefits and harms were used for all CapaCiTY reviews that closely adhered to PRISMA 2016 guidance. Main conclusions were presented as summary evidence statements (SES) with a summative Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine (2009) level. RESULTS: Forty articles were identified, providing data on outcomes in 2045 patients. Evidence was derived almost exclusively from observational studies, the majority of which concerned colectomy and ileorectal anastomosis (CIRA) rather than other procedural variations. Average length of stay (LOS) ranged between 7-15 days. Although inconsistent, laparoscopic surgery may be associated with longer mean operating times (210 vs 167 min) and modest decreases in LOS (10-8 days). Complications occurred in approximately 24% of patients. Six (0.4%) procedure-related deaths were observed. Recurrent episodes of small bowel obstruction occurred in about 15% (95%CI: 10-21%) of patients in the long-term, with significant burden of re-hospitalisation and frequent recourse to surgery. Most patients reported a satisfactory or good outcome after colectomy but negative long-term functional outcomes persist in a minority of patients. The influence of resection extent, anastomotic configuration and method of access on complication rates remains uncertain. Available evidence weakly supports selection of patients with an isolated slow-transit phenotype. CONCLUSION: Colectomy for CC may benefit some patients but at the cost of substantial short- and long-term morbidity. Current evidence is insufficient to guide patient or procedural selection.

Surgery for constipation: systematic review and practice recommendations: Graded practice and future research recommendations.

AIM: This manuscript forms the final of seven that address the surgical management of chronic constipation (CC) in adults. The content coalesces results from the five systematic reviews that precede it and of the European Consensus process to derive graded practice recommendations (GPR). METHODS: Summary of review data, development of GPR and future research recommendations as outlined in detail in the 'introduction and methods' paper. RESULTS: The overall quality of data in the five reviews was poor with 113/156(72.4%) of included studies providing only level IV evidence and only four included level I RCTs. Coalescence of data from the five procedural classes revealed that few firm conclusions could be drawn regarding procedural choice or patient selection: no single procedure dominated in addressing dynamic structural abnormalities of the anorectum and pelvic floor with each having similar overall efficacy. Of one hundred 'prototype' GPRs developed by the clinical guideline group, 85/100 were deemed 'appropriate' based on the independent scoring of a panel of 18 European experts and use of RAND-UCLA consensus methodology. The remaining 15 were all deemed uncertain. Future research recommendations included some potential RCTs but also a strong emphasis on delivery of large multinational high-quality prospective cohort studies. CONCLUSION: While the evidence base for surgery in CC is poor, the widespread European consensus for GPRs is encouraging. Professional bodies have the opportunity to build on this work by supporting the efforts of their membership to help convert the documented recommendations into clinical guidelines.

Surgery for constipation: systematic review and practice recommendations: Results IV: Recto-vaginal reinforcement procedures.

AIM: To assess the outcomes of recto-vaginal reinforcement procedures in adults with chronic constipation. METHOD: Standardised methods and reporting of benefits and harms were used for all CapaCiTY reviews that closely adhered to PRISMA 2016 guidance. Main conclusions were presented as summary evidence statements with a summative Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine (2009) level. RESULTS: Forty-three articles were identified, providing data on outcomes in 3346 patients. Average length of procedures ranged between 20 and 169 min, and length of stay between 1 and 15 days. Complications typically occurred after 7-17% of procedures (range 0-61%). Post-operative bleeding was uncommon (0-4%) as well as haematoma or sepsis (0-2%). Fistulation did not occur in most studies. Two procedure-related deaths were observed for 3209 patients. Although inconsistent, 78% of patients reported a satisfactory or good outcome, with 30-50% experiencing reduced symptoms of straining, incomplete emptying or reduced vaginal digitation. About 17% of patients developed anatomical recurrence. Considering measures of harm and global satisfaction rating scales, there was insufficient evidence to prefer one type of procedure over another. There was no evidence to support better outcomes based on selection of patients with a particular size or grade of rectocoele. CONCLUSION: Evidence supporting recto-vaginal reinforcement procedures is currently derived from observational studies and comparisons, with only one high quality study. Large trials are needed to inform future clinical decision making.