Cargando…

Anoplasty for anatomical anal stenosis: systematic review of complications and recurrences

AIM: The optimal surgical treatment for anatomical anal stenosis (AS) remains to be determined. The aim of this study was to determine the rates of complications and recurrence after anoplasty for anatomical AS and, wherever feasible, compare the outcomes for the various techniques. METHOD: A PROSPE...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gallo, Gaetano, Picciariello, Arcangelo, Di Tanna, Gian Luca, Pelizzo, Patrizia, Altomare, Donato Francesco, Trompetto, Mario, Santoro, Giulio Aniello, Roviello, Franco, Felice, Carla, Grossi, Ugo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10086798/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35792887
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/codi.16248
_version_ 1785022221229490176
author Gallo, Gaetano
Picciariello, Arcangelo
Di Tanna, Gian Luca
Pelizzo, Patrizia
Altomare, Donato Francesco
Trompetto, Mario
Santoro, Giulio Aniello
Roviello, Franco
Felice, Carla
Grossi, Ugo
author_facet Gallo, Gaetano
Picciariello, Arcangelo
Di Tanna, Gian Luca
Pelizzo, Patrizia
Altomare, Donato Francesco
Trompetto, Mario
Santoro, Giulio Aniello
Roviello, Franco
Felice, Carla
Grossi, Ugo
author_sort Gallo, Gaetano
collection PubMed
description AIM: The optimal surgical treatment for anatomical anal stenosis (AS) remains to be determined. The aim of this study was to determine the rates of complications and recurrence after anoplasty for anatomical AS and, wherever feasible, compare the outcomes for the various techniques. METHOD: A PROSPERO‐registered systematic review was reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses guidelines. Medline, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library of Systematic Review, Scopus and Web of Science were searched for articles published up to May 2021. Studies that assessed the outcomes of anoplasty in adult patients with anatomical AS were selected. The primary outcomes were complications and recurrence. The methodological quality of studies was appraised using the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tools. RESULTS: From the total of 2705 unique screened records, 151 were assessed for eligibility. Only 29 studies (two prospective) met the inclusion criteria, reporting data on 556 patients [mean age 53 (18–83) years, 46% female]. Previous history of surgery for haemorrhoidal disease accounted for three quarters of cases. A total of 14 types of anoplasty were found, with the Y–V flap being the most performed technique [27% of cases (n = 149)]. Complications frequently occurred, with a pooled prevalence of 10.2% (95% CI 3.9%–24.1%) after Y–V flap and 11.5% (5.3%–23.0%) after rhomboid/diamond flap. Patients undergoing house flap achieved better results in terms of clinical improvement, satisfaction and quality of life compared with Y–V flap and rhomboid/diamond flap. When considering only studies with at least 12 months of follow‐up, the pooled prevalence of recurrence was 4.7% (2.2%–9.8%), with significantly higher rates observed in the prospective versus retrospective series [pooled prevalence 18.9% (11.5%–29.5%) vs. 3.6% (1.7–7.8%), respectively; p < 0.001]. CONCLUSION: Both complications and recurrence were significantly lower after house flap compared with rhomboid/diamond and Y–V flap. Better designed multicentre studies with longer follow‐up are needed to confirm these findings. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021239493.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10086798
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-100867982023-04-12 Anoplasty for anatomical anal stenosis: systematic review of complications and recurrences Gallo, Gaetano Picciariello, Arcangelo Di Tanna, Gian Luca Pelizzo, Patrizia Altomare, Donato Francesco Trompetto, Mario Santoro, Giulio Aniello Roviello, Franco Felice, Carla Grossi, Ugo Colorectal Dis Systematic Review and Meta‐analysis AIM: The optimal surgical treatment for anatomical anal stenosis (AS) remains to be determined. The aim of this study was to determine the rates of complications and recurrence after anoplasty for anatomical AS and, wherever feasible, compare the outcomes for the various techniques. METHOD: A PROSPERO‐registered systematic review was reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses guidelines. Medline, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library of Systematic Review, Scopus and Web of Science were searched for articles published up to May 2021. Studies that assessed the outcomes of anoplasty in adult patients with anatomical AS were selected. The primary outcomes were complications and recurrence. The methodological quality of studies was appraised using the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tools. RESULTS: From the total of 2705 unique screened records, 151 were assessed for eligibility. Only 29 studies (two prospective) met the inclusion criteria, reporting data on 556 patients [mean age 53 (18–83) years, 46% female]. Previous history of surgery for haemorrhoidal disease accounted for three quarters of cases. A total of 14 types of anoplasty were found, with the Y–V flap being the most performed technique [27% of cases (n = 149)]. Complications frequently occurred, with a pooled prevalence of 10.2% (95% CI 3.9%–24.1%) after Y–V flap and 11.5% (5.3%–23.0%) after rhomboid/diamond flap. Patients undergoing house flap achieved better results in terms of clinical improvement, satisfaction and quality of life compared with Y–V flap and rhomboid/diamond flap. When considering only studies with at least 12 months of follow‐up, the pooled prevalence of recurrence was 4.7% (2.2%–9.8%), with significantly higher rates observed in the prospective versus retrospective series [pooled prevalence 18.9% (11.5%–29.5%) vs. 3.6% (1.7–7.8%), respectively; p < 0.001]. CONCLUSION: Both complications and recurrence were significantly lower after house flap compared with rhomboid/diamond and Y–V flap. Better designed multicentre studies with longer follow‐up are needed to confirm these findings. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021239493. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-07-31 2022-12 /pmc/articles/PMC10086798/ /pubmed/35792887 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/codi.16248 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Colorectal Disease published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Systematic Review and Meta‐analysis
Gallo, Gaetano
Picciariello, Arcangelo
Di Tanna, Gian Luca
Pelizzo, Patrizia
Altomare, Donato Francesco
Trompetto, Mario
Santoro, Giulio Aniello
Roviello, Franco
Felice, Carla
Grossi, Ugo
Anoplasty for anatomical anal stenosis: systematic review of complications and recurrences
title Anoplasty for anatomical anal stenosis: systematic review of complications and recurrences
title_full Anoplasty for anatomical anal stenosis: systematic review of complications and recurrences
title_fullStr Anoplasty for anatomical anal stenosis: systematic review of complications and recurrences
title_full_unstemmed Anoplasty for anatomical anal stenosis: systematic review of complications and recurrences
title_short Anoplasty for anatomical anal stenosis: systematic review of complications and recurrences
title_sort anoplasty for anatomical anal stenosis: systematic review of complications and recurrences
topic Systematic Review and Meta‐analysis
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10086798/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35792887
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/codi.16248
work_keys_str_mv AT gallogaetano anoplastyforanatomicalanalstenosissystematicreviewofcomplicationsandrecurrences
AT picciarielloarcangelo anoplastyforanatomicalanalstenosissystematicreviewofcomplicationsandrecurrences
AT ditannagianluca anoplastyforanatomicalanalstenosissystematicreviewofcomplicationsandrecurrences
AT pelizzopatrizia anoplastyforanatomicalanalstenosissystematicreviewofcomplicationsandrecurrences
AT altomaredonatofrancesco anoplastyforanatomicalanalstenosissystematicreviewofcomplicationsandrecurrences
AT trompettomario anoplastyforanatomicalanalstenosissystematicreviewofcomplicationsandrecurrences
AT santorogiulioaniello anoplastyforanatomicalanalstenosissystematicreviewofcomplicationsandrecurrences
AT roviellofranco anoplastyforanatomicalanalstenosissystematicreviewofcomplicationsandrecurrences
AT felicecarla anoplastyforanatomicalanalstenosissystematicreviewofcomplicationsandrecurrences
AT grossiugo anoplastyforanatomicalanalstenosissystematicreviewofcomplicationsandrecurrences