Surgery · 2021
FISSIT (Fistula Surgery in Italy) study: A retrospective survey on the surgical management of anal fistulas in Italy over the last 15 years.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНаблюдательное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Litta Francesco, Bracchitta Salvatore, Naldini Gabriele, Mistrangelo Massimiliano, Tricomi Nicola, La Torre Marco, Altomare Donato Francesco, Mozzon Marta, Testa Alessandro, Zigiotto Daniele, Sica Giuseppe, Tutino Roberta, Lisi Giorgio, Marino Fabio, Luglio Gaetano, Vergari Roberto, Terrosu Giovanni, Cantarella Francesco, Foti Nicola, Giuliani Antonio, Moroni Rossana, Ratto Carlo, SICCR (Società Italiana di Chirurgia Colo-Rettale) FISSIT Study Group
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Surgical treatment of anal fistulas is still a challenge. The aims of this study were to evaluate the adoption and healing rates for the different surgical techniques used in Italy over the past 15 years.
METHODS: This was a multicenter retrospective observational study of patients affected by simple and complex anal fistulas of cryptoglandular origin who were surgically treated in the period 2003-2017. Surgical techniques were grouped as sphincter-cutting or sphincter-sparing and as technology-assisted or techno-free. All patients included in the study were followed for at least 12 months.
RESULTS: A total of 9,536 patients (5,520 simple; 4,016 complex fistulas) entered the study. For simple fistulas, fistulotomy was the most frequently used procedure, although its adoption significantly decreased over the years (P < .0005), with an increase in sphincter-sparing approaches; the overall healing rate in simple fistulas was 81.1%, with a significant difference between sphincter-cutting (91.9%) and sphincter-sparing (65.1%) techniques (P = .001). For complex fistulas, the adoption of sphincter-cutting approaches decreased, while sphincter-sparing techniques were mildly preferred (P < .0005). Moreover, there was a significant trend toward the use of technology-assisted procedures. The overall healing rate for complex fistulas was 69.0%, with a measurable difference between sphincter-cutting (81.1%) and sphincter-sparing (61.4%; P = .001) techniques and between techno-free and technology-assisted techniques (72.5% and 55.0%, respectively; P = .001).
CONCLUSION: Surgical treatment of anal fistulas has changed, with a trend toward the use of sphincter-sparing techniques. The overall cure rate has remained stable, even if the most innovative procedures have achieved a lower success rate.
METHODS: This was a multicenter retrospective observational study of patients affected by simple and complex anal fistulas of cryptoglandular origin who were surgically treated in the period 2003-2017. Surgical techniques were grouped as sphincter-cutting or sphincter-sparing and as technology-assisted or techno-free. All patients included in the study were followed for at least 12 months.
RESULTS: A total of 9,536 patients (5,520 simple; 4,016 complex fistulas) entered the study. For simple fistulas, fistulotomy was the most frequently used procedure, although its adoption significantly decreased over the years (P < .0005), with an increase in sphincter-sparing approaches; the overall healing rate in simple fistulas was 81.1%, with a significant difference between sphincter-cutting (91.9%) and sphincter-sparing (65.1%) techniques (P = .001). For complex fistulas, the adoption of sphincter-cutting approaches decreased, while sphincter-sparing techniques were mildly preferred (P < .0005). Moreover, there was a significant trend toward the use of technology-assisted procedures. The overall healing rate for complex fistulas was 69.0%, with a measurable difference between sphincter-cutting (81.1%) and sphincter-sparing (61.4%; P = .001) techniques and between techno-free and technology-assisted techniques (72.5% and 55.0%, respectively; P = .001).
CONCLUSION: Surgical treatment of anal fistulas has changed, with a trend toward the use of sphincter-sparing techniques. The overall cure rate has remained stable, even if the most innovative procedures have achieved a lower success rate.