Video-assisted anal fistula treatment versus fistulectomy and sphincter repair in the treatment of high cryptoglandular anal fistula: a randomized clinical study

Background Video-assisted anal fistula treatment (VAAFT) may have a recurrence rate comparable to that of fistulectomy and sphincter repair (FSR) in the treatment of high anal fistula and with potential advantages in wound healing, functional outcome and quality of life. The aim and objectives of the study are to compare the outcome of VAAFT with that of FSR for high cryptoglandular anal fistula. Methods This was a single-centre randomized controlled trial of adults with high anal fistula comparing FSR with VAAFT. Primary outcome was fistula recurrence. Secondary outcomes were results of anal manometry, quality of life and faecal continence. A power calculation of 33 patients in each arm (1 : 1) was based on recurrence in the FSR and VAAFT groups of 5 per cent and 30 per cent respectively. Follow-up at 6 months after surgery included physical examination, MRI, anal manometry, quality-of-life assessment (RAND SF 36 questionnaire) and faecal-continence assessment (Wexner score). Results The study was terminated early due to high recurrence rates in both groups. A total of 45 patients were included. Recurrence rates were 65 per cent for VAAFT and 27 per cent for FSR, with hazard ratio 4.18 (P = 0.016). Length of the fistula was a risk factor with an association with recurrence (hazard ratio 1.8, P = 0.020). There were significant differences in quality of life in favour of FSR and in anal manometry in favour of VAAFT with a significant improvement in Wexner score in both groups. Conclusion FSR was associated with a lower recurrence rate than VAAFT in the management of complex anal fistulae in this single-centre study but the study was terminated early due to higher than predicted recurrence rate in both groups. Registration number NCT02585167 (http://www.clinicaltrials.org).

Effect of a subsequent pregnancy on anal sphincter integrity and function after obstetric anal sphincter injury (OASI)

Introduction and hypothesis Endoanal ultrasound (EAUS) and anal manometry are used in the assessment women with a history of obstetric anal sphincter injury (OASI), both postpartum and in a subsequent pregnancy, to aid counselling regarding mode of delivery (MOD). Methods A prospective observational study between 2012 to 2020 was completed. Women were reviewed 3 months postpartum following OASI and in the second half of a subsequent pregnancy. Anorectal symptoms were measured using the validated St Mark’s Incontinence Score (SMIS: asymptomatic to mild symptoms = ≤ 4). Anal manometry (incremental maximum squeeze pressure [iMSP: normal = > 20 mmHg]) and EAUS (abnormal = sphincter defect > 1 h in size) were performed. Results One hundred forty-six women were identified and 67.8% had an anal sphincter defect ≤ 1 h in size postnatally. In those with a defect ≤ 1 h, postpartum mean iMSP and SMIS significantly improved in a subsequent pregnancy (p = 0.04 and p = 0.01, respectively). In women with a defect > 1 h, there was no significant difference between the mean iMSP or SMIS score postnatally compared to a subsequent pregnancy. At both time points, significantly more women had an anal sphincter defect ≤ 1 h and SMIS of ≤ 4 (p = 0.001 and p < 0.001 respectively) compared to those with a defect < 1 h. In addition, significantly more women had an anal sphincter defect ≤ 1 h and iMSP ≥ 20 mmHg (p < 0.001). Overall, out of the 146 women included in this study, 76 (52.1%) with a defect ≤ 1 h also had an iMSP ≥ 20 mmHg and SMIS ≤ 4 at 3 months postpartum. Conclusions Women who remain asymptomatic with normal anal manometry and no abnormal sphincter defects on EAUS postnatally do not need to have these investigations repeated in a subsequent pregnancy and can be recommended to have a vaginal delivery. If our protocol was modified, over half of the women in this study could have had their MOD recommendation made in the postnatal period alone.

Analyzing the Role of Anal Sphincter Pressure in Rectocele Formation

Purpose: Constipation is a common entity in society with various factors in the etiology. In this study, we evaluated the role of anal sphincter pressure of patients who refer to surgery clinic with complaint of constipation.Methods: Sixty patients who refer to surgery clinic with complaint of constipation and were diagnosed with constipation due to Rome III criteria between July 2010 and September 2014. These patients were evaluated with defecography and were divided into 2 groups based on presence of rectocele. Both groups’ anal sphincter pressures were evaluated using anal manometry and findings were compared.Results: The patients with rectocele and without rectocele using defecography were inspected with anal manometry regarding resting tone pressure, squeeze pressure, maximum squeeze pressure and simulated defecation response pressure, first sensation volume, urge sensation volume, and maximum tolerable volume. &#x0052;esults were compared and no significant difference was found regarding groups with rectocele and without rectocele (P > 0.05).Conclusion: We have proved the hypothesis arguing that increased sphincter pressures do not play a role in the formation of rectocele by inducing an obstruction and the formation of dilation in proximal bowel, and demonstrated that the presence of rectocele is not dependent on an increase in sphincter pressures.