Cargando…

Video-Assisted Anal Fistula Treatment: Pros and Cons of This Minimally Invasive Method for Treatment of Perianal Fistulas

PURPOSE: The purpose of this paper is to present results of a single-center, nonrandomized, prospective study of the video-assisted anal fistula treatment (VAAFT). METHODS: 68 consecutive patients with perianal fistulas were operated on using the VAAFT technique. 30 of the patients had simple fistul...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Romaniszyn, Michal, Walega, Piotr
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5478827/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28680443
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2017/9518310
_version_ 1783245032968421376
author Romaniszyn, Michal
Walega, Piotr
author_facet Romaniszyn, Michal
Walega, Piotr
author_sort Romaniszyn, Michal
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: The purpose of this paper is to present results of a single-center, nonrandomized, prospective study of the video-assisted anal fistula treatment (VAAFT). METHODS: 68 consecutive patients with perianal fistulas were operated on using the VAAFT technique. 30 of the patients had simple fistulas, and 38 had complex fistulas. The mean follow-up time was 31 months. RESULTS: The overall healing rate was 54.41% (37 of the 68 patients healed with no recurrence during the follow-up period). The results varied depending on the type of fistula. The success rate for the group with simple fistulas was 73.3%, whereas it was only 39.47% for the group with complex fistulas. Female patients achieved higher healing rates for both simple (81.82% versus 68.42%) and complex fistulas (77.78% versus 27.59%). There were no major complications. CONCLUSIONS: The results of VAAFT vary greatly depending on the type of fistula. The procedure has some drawbacks due to the rigid construction of the fistuloscope and the diameter of the shaft. The electrocautery of the fistula tract from the inside can be insufficient to close wide tracts. However, low risk of complications permits repetition of the treatment until success is achieved. Careful selection of patients is advised.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5478827
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Hindawi
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-54788272017-07-05 Video-Assisted Anal Fistula Treatment: Pros and Cons of This Minimally Invasive Method for Treatment of Perianal Fistulas Romaniszyn, Michal Walega, Piotr Gastroenterol Res Pract Clinical Study PURPOSE: The purpose of this paper is to present results of a single-center, nonrandomized, prospective study of the video-assisted anal fistula treatment (VAAFT). METHODS: 68 consecutive patients with perianal fistulas were operated on using the VAAFT technique. 30 of the patients had simple fistulas, and 38 had complex fistulas. The mean follow-up time was 31 months. RESULTS: The overall healing rate was 54.41% (37 of the 68 patients healed with no recurrence during the follow-up period). The results varied depending on the type of fistula. The success rate for the group with simple fistulas was 73.3%, whereas it was only 39.47% for the group with complex fistulas. Female patients achieved higher healing rates for both simple (81.82% versus 68.42%) and complex fistulas (77.78% versus 27.59%). There were no major complications. CONCLUSIONS: The results of VAAFT vary greatly depending on the type of fistula. The procedure has some drawbacks due to the rigid construction of the fistuloscope and the diameter of the shaft. The electrocautery of the fistula tract from the inside can be insufficient to close wide tracts. However, low risk of complications permits repetition of the treatment until success is achieved. Careful selection of patients is advised. Hindawi 2017 2017-06-07 /pmc/articles/PMC5478827/ /pubmed/28680443 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2017/9518310 Text en Copyright © 2017 Michal Romaniszyn and Piotr Walega. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Clinical Study
Romaniszyn, Michal
Walega, Piotr
Video-Assisted Anal Fistula Treatment: Pros and Cons of This Minimally Invasive Method for Treatment of Perianal Fistulas
title Video-Assisted Anal Fistula Treatment: Pros and Cons of This Minimally Invasive Method for Treatment of Perianal Fistulas
title_full Video-Assisted Anal Fistula Treatment: Pros and Cons of This Minimally Invasive Method for Treatment of Perianal Fistulas
title_fullStr Video-Assisted Anal Fistula Treatment: Pros and Cons of This Minimally Invasive Method for Treatment of Perianal Fistulas
title_full_unstemmed Video-Assisted Anal Fistula Treatment: Pros and Cons of This Minimally Invasive Method for Treatment of Perianal Fistulas
title_short Video-Assisted Anal Fistula Treatment: Pros and Cons of This Minimally Invasive Method for Treatment of Perianal Fistulas
title_sort video-assisted anal fistula treatment: pros and cons of this minimally invasive method for treatment of perianal fistulas
topic Clinical Study
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5478827/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28680443
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2017/9518310
work_keys_str_mv AT romaniszynmichal videoassistedanalfistulatreatmentprosandconsofthisminimallyinvasivemethodfortreatmentofperianalfistulas
AT walegapiotr videoassistedanalfistulatreatmentprosandconsofthisminimallyinvasivemethodfortreatmentofperianalfistulas