These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Systematic review and meta-analysis of endorectal advancement flap and ligation of the intersphincteric fistula tract for cryptoglandular and Crohn's high perianal fistulas.
    Author: Stellingwerf ME, van Praag EM, Tozer PJ, Bemelman WA, Buskens CJ.
    Journal: BJS Open; 2019 Jun; 3(3):231-241. PubMed ID: 31183438.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: High perianal fistulas require sphincter-preserving surgery because of the risk of faecal incontinence. The ligation of the intersphincteric fistula tract (LIFT) procedure preserves anal sphincter function and is an alternative to the endorectal advancement flap (AF). The aim of this study was to evaluate outcomes of these procedures in patients with cryptoglandular and Crohn's perianal fistulas. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed using MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Library. All RCTs, cohort studies and case series (more than 5 patients) describing one or both techniques were included. Main outcomes were overall success rate, recurrence and incontinence following either technique. A proportional meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model. RESULTS: Some 30 studies comprising 1295 patients were included (AF, 797; LIFT, 498). For cryptoglandular fistula (1098 patients), there was no significant difference between AF and LIFT for weighted overall success (74·6 (95 per cent c.i. 65·6 to 83·7) versus 69·1 (53·9 to 84·3) per cent respectively) and recurrence (25·6 (4·7 to 46·4) versus 21·9 (14·8 to 29·0) per cent) rates. For Crohn's perianal fistula (64 patients), no significant differences were observed between AF and LIFT for overall success rate (61 (45 to 76) versus 53 per cent respectively), but data on recurrence were limited. Incontinence rates were significantly higher after AF compared with LIFT (7·8 (3·3 to 12·4) versus 1·6 (0·4 to 2·8) per cent). CONCLUSION: Overall success and recurrence rates were not significantly different between the AF and LIFT procedure, but continence was better preserved after LIFT.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]