Topic Highlight Open Access
Copyright ©2011 Baishideng Publishing Group Co., Limited. All rights reserved.
World J Gastroenterol. Jul 28, 2011; 17(28): 3297-3299
Published online Jul 28, 2011. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v17.i28.3297
Why do we have to review our experience in managing cases with idiopathic fistula-in-ano regularly?
Claudio Fucini, Department of Medical and Surgical Critical Care, Section of General Surgery, University of Florence, Florence 50100, Italy
Iacopo Giani, Department of Medicine and Surgery-USL8 Arezzo, Section of General Surgery Valdichiana, Arezzo, Italy
Author contributions: Fucini C and Giani I both generated the ideas and contributed to the writing of this manuscript.
Correspondence to: Iacopo Giani, MD, Department of Medicine and Surgery-USL8 Arezzo, Section of General Surgery Valdichiana, Arezzo, Italy. iaky79@hotmail.com
Telephone: +39-339-6179324 Fax: +39-574-657482
Received: September 10, 2010
Revised: November 12, 2010
Accepted: November 19, 2010
Published online: July 28, 2011

Abstract

“Why do we have to review our experience in managing idiopathic fistula-in-ano regularly?” In order to answer this apparently simple question, we reviewed our clinical and surgical cases and most important relevant literature to find a rational and scientific answer. It would appear that whatever method you adopt in fistula management, there is a price to pay regarding either rate of recurrence (higher with conservative methods) or impairment of continence (higher with traditional surgery). Since, at the moment, reliable data to identify a treatment as a gold standard in the management of anal fistulas are lacking, the correct approach to this condition must consider all the anatomic and clinicopathological aspects of the disease; this knowledge joined to an eclectic attitude of the surgeon, who should be familiar with different types of treatment, is the only guarantee for a satisfactory treatment. As a conclusion, it is worthwhile to remember that adequate initial treatment significantly reduces recurrence, which, when it occurs, is usually due to failure to recognise the tract and primary opening at the initial operation.

Key Words: Anal fistula treatment; Surgery of fistula-in-ano; Anal cryptoglandular infections; Anal abscess; Recurrent fistula-in-ano

“Why do we have to review our experience in managing idiopathic fistula-in-ano regularly?”

The answer to the above question is quite straightforward: surgeons are aware of the poor levels of evidence in anal fistula surgery. Despite the high frequency of suppurative ano-perianal lesions of suspected cryptoglandular origin (idiopathic abscess and fistula-in-ano), the ideal treatment with outcomes of no recurrence, minimal incontinence and good quality of life is still a matter of debate. The traditional surgical treatments which include a division of a continuous part of the sphincteric complex (in particular of the superficial external sphincter in transphincteric fistulas) have been strongly challenged, especially in the last 10-20 years since high rates of impairment of continence have been reported in several experiences[1,2].

In spite of a high successful healing rate varying from 87% to 100%[3], the traditional invasive methods of fistulotomy (with/without draining or slow-cutting seton) and fistulectomy (with closure of internal opening with/without sphincter defect repair) have given way to a number of sphincter-sparing methods: endorectal muscular or mucosal advancement flap[4,5], island flap anoplasty[6], radiofrequency ablation[7], fistulous tract filling with fibrin or cyanoacrylate glue[8,9], porcine small intestine submucosa-derived anal fistula plug[10], ayurvedic seton[11], ligation of intersphincteric fistula tract (LIFT) procedure[12,13], glue containing adipose-derived stem cells[14], and finally VAAFT (video-assisted anal fistula treatment) carried out with the Storz Meinero fistuloscope®[15].

This continuous research for an ideal conservative method is compelled by concepts recently restated by the Standards of Practice Task Force of the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons[16] and by the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland: division of > 30% of the external sphincter should be undertaken with considerable caution for the relevant risk of impairment of anorectal continence, particularly in females, those with anterior fistulas, advanced aged patients, history of previous anorectal surgery, childbirth, fistula associated with Crohn’s disease and obviously in patients with a history of continence impairment not related to the fistula[17].

Indeed, the necessity to identify patients with high risk of incontinence after classic surgical treatment has been stressed over the past few years[18,19]. These patients, representing a limited number of subjects, have been treated with a conservative approach usually represented by the non-cutting draining seton. Thus, considering that the reported rate of impairment of continence after traditional fistula surgery varies from 0% to 82%[20], the doubt arises that the definition of “incontinence” is not the same for all authors and that factors other than the amount of divided sphincter may have a role in continence disturbance. In addition, as already observed by Parks[18], the degree of impairment of anal continence after fistulotomy is not strictly tied to the type of fistula treated and the amount of severed muscle; patients treated for suprasphincteric fistulas (theoretically at higher risk of incontinence) fared better than patients treated for transphincteric fistulas[18]. Nevertheless, it seems obvious that a risk of continence impairment is present when a sphincter is cut or stretched. Also, a trivial lateral internal sphincterotomy for the cure of fissure or a hemorrhoidectomy has a risk of continence impairment[2].

As regards fistula treatment, the question is whether a real advantage is offered by the new proposed methods, especially in the management of the so-called “complex fistulas”.

According to several authors[4,18,21], a complex fistula must have one or more of the following features: the tract crosses more than 30% to 50% of the external sphincter; the fistula is anterior in a female; multiple tracts are present; the fistula is recurrent; there is pre-existing incontinence; the perianal area has been irradiated; there is concomitant Crohn’s disease.

A recent review of randomized studies in the literature[11] evaluated some proposed conservative methods vs traditional surgery (in particular: anal sphincter-preserving seton, conventional seton, ayurvedic seton, conventional fistulotomy with/without seton, radiofrequency, advancement flap with/without fibrin glue, island flap anoplasty, fistulectomy) and concluded that there were no significant differences in recurrence rates or incontinence rates in any of the studied comparisons, except in the case of advancement flaps where the lowest incontinence rates were reported. However, in other experiences of advancement flap procedures, which have been demonstrated as reliable with 77% to 100% healing rates and 21% recurrences, nevertheless 40% of patients had some impairment of continence and 9% presented major disturbance[22,23]. Advancement flap is not a simple procedure and damage of the sphincter is possible. In fact, it has been reported[24] that patients with complex fistulas undergoing fistulectomy with immediate sphincter repair had less recurrences and continence impairment than patients submitted to endoanal advancement flap.

It would appear that whatever method you adopt in fistula management, there is a price to pay regarding either rate of recurrence (higher with conservative methods) or impairment of continence (higher with traditional surgery).

The point is that it is difficult to establish whether, and to what degree, an impairment of continence has a negative effect on the quality of life (QoL) greater than the distress caused by multiple recurrences of a fistulous abscess or fistula.

The assessment of personal impairment in relation to objective medical findings represents a problem in the evaluation of incontinence. The degree of sphincter dysfunction does not always correlate with the patient’s subjective awareness of his functional deficit[2]. QoL parameters in fistula surgery are generally based on incontinence scores; however, QoL has a multidimensional aspect that must be taken into account.

The promising results reported by some authors regarding the two least invasive conservative methods, fibrin glue[25] and Surgisis® AFPTM anal fistula plug[10], are interesting (almost none of the patients report impairment of continence); however, their efficacy in healing the fistulas needs to be better evaluated. Healing rates from 31% to 85% have been reported for fibrin glue and from 14% to 87% for the plug[9]. Most of the reported experiences suffer from a small number of patients and short follow-up (often less than 6 mo), with the highest rate of success being for simple uncomplicated fistulas in which traditional treatments have also a high rate of success with low rate of continence impairment[9]. Lack of long-term randomized studies is the other limiting factor for evaluating the efficacy of these procedures. Immediate healing of a fistulous tract does not mean that the infection has disappeared. A fistula can recur after months or years in the same tract or nearby. It must also be considered that when a fistula recurs, patients tend to change surgeon; similarly to what happens in recurring inguinal hernia. Regardless, the adoption of bioprosthetic material as a first-line treatment in complex anal fistulas is recommended by several authors[26,27] ahead of the more prudent suggestions of the consensus conference promoted by the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland[28].

Since, at the moment, reliable data to identify a treatment as a gold standard for the management of anal fistula are lacking, the correct approach to this condition must be to consider all the anatomic and clinicopathological aspects of the disease. This knowledge joined to an eclectic attitude of the surgeon, who should be familiar with different types of treatment, is the only guarantee for a satisfactory outcome.

As a conclusion, it is worthwhile to remember the following concepts and facts: an adequate initial treatment significantly reduces recurrence, which when it occurs is usually due to failure to recognise the tract and primary opening at the initial operation[19,29-31]; many complex fistulas are iatrogenic in origin[32]; in the acute phase (fistulous abscess) a radical treatment should be attempted only by experienced colorectal surgeons[19]; primary suprasphincteric or extrasphincteric fistulas (according to Parks’ classification) of cryptoglandular origin are very rare if not nonexistent[32]; it is essential to have a three dimensional vision of the anorectal region to understand the pathway of diffusion of cryptoglandular infections; a preoperative evaluation of risk factors for incontinence, including frequency of defecation, bowel function and sphincter function, is also mandatory in non-complex fistulas.



Footnotes

Peer reviewers: Damian Casadesus Rodriguez, MD, PhD, Calixto Garcia University Hospital, J and University, Vedado, Havana City, Cuba; Donato F Altomare, MD, Professor, Department of Emergency and Organ Transplantation, University of Bari, Piazza G Cesare, 11-70124 Bari, Italy

S- Editor Tian L L- Editor Logan S E- Editor Ma WH

References
1.  Garcia-Aguilar J, Belmonte C, Wong WD, Goldberg SM, Madoff RD. Anal fistula surgery. Factors associated with recurrence and incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum. 1996;39:723-729.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
2.  Ommer A, Wenger FA, Rolfs T, Walz MK. Continence disorders after anal surgery--a relevant problem? Int J Colorectal Dis. 2008;23:1023-1031.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
3.  Keighley MRB, Williams NS.  Surgery of the anus, rectum and colon 1993. London: Saunders; .  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
4.  Kodner IJ, Mazor A, Shemesh EI, Fry RD, Fleshman JW, Birnbaum EH. Endorectal advancement flap repair of rectovaginal and other complicated anorectal fistulas. Surgery. 1993;114:682-689; discussion 689-690.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
5.  Golub RW, Wise WE Jr, Kerner BA, Khanduja KS, Aguilar PS. Endorectal mucosal advancement flap: the preferred method for complex cryptoglandular fistula-in-ano. J Gastrointest Surg. 1997;1:487-491.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
6.  Ho KS, Ho YH. Controlled, randomized trial of island flap anoplasty for treatment of trans-sphincteric fistula-in-ano: early results. Tech Coloproctol. 2005;9:166-168.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
7.  Gupta P. Anal fistulotomy by radiofrequency. J Nippon Med Sch. 2004;71:287-291.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
8.  Patrlj L, Kocman B, Martinac M, Jadrijevic S, Sosa T, Sebecic B, Brkljacic B. Fibrin glue-antibiotic mixture in the treatment of anal fistulae: experience with 69 cases. Dig Surg. 2000;17:77-80.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
9.  Rizzo JA, Naig AL, Johnson EK. Anorectal abscess and fistula-in-ano: evidence-based management. Surg Clin North Am. 2010;90:45-68, Table of Contents.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
10.  Johnson EK, Gaw JU, Armstrong DN. Efficacy of anal fistula plug vs. fibrin glue in closure of anorectal fistulas. Dis Colon Rectum. 2006;49:371-376.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
11.  Jacob TJ, Perakath B, Keighley MR. Surgical intervention for anorectal fistula. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;CD006319.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
12.  Rojanasakul A, Pattanaarun J, Sahakitrungruang C, Tantiphlachiva K. Total anal sphincter saving technique for fistula-in-ano; the ligation of intersphincteric fistula tract. J Med Assoc Thai. 2007;90:581-586.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
13.  Matos D, Lunniss PJ, Phillips RK. Total sphincter conservation in high fistula in ano: results of a new approach. Br J Surg. 1993;80:802-804.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
14.  Garcia-Olmo D, Herreros D, Pascual I, Pascual JA, Del-Valle E, Zorrilla J, De-La-Quintana P, Garcia-Arranz M, Pascual M. Expanded adipose-derived stem cells for the treatment of complex perianal fistula: a phase II clinical trial. Dis Colon Rectum. 2009;52:79-86.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
15.  Mori L VAAFT in the treatment of fistula-in ano. Paper presented at the Workshop regionale: Nuove tecnologie in chirurgia colorettale. Firenze, 18 Giugno 2010; .  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
16.  Whiteford MH, Kilkenny J 3rd, Hyman N, Buie WD, Cohen J, Orsay C, Dunn G, Perry WB, Ellis CN, Rakinic J. Practice parameters for the treatment of perianal abscess and fistula-in-ano (revised). Dis Colon Rectum. 2005;48:1337-1342.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
17.  Williams JG, Farrands PA, Williams AB, Taylor BA, Lunniss PJ, Sagar PM, Varma JS, George BD. The treatment of anal fistula: ACPGBI position statement. Colorectal Dis. 2007;9 Suppl 4:18-50.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
18.  Parks AG, Stitz RW. The treatment of high fistula-in-ano. Dis Colon Rectum. 1976;19:487-499.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
19.  Fucini C. One stage treatment of anal abscesses and fistulas. A clinical appraisal on the basis of two different classifications. Int J Colorectal Dis. 1991;6:12-16.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
20.  Sjödahl R. Proposal: a score to select patients for fistulotomy. Colorectal Dis. 2010;12:487-489.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
21.  Mizrahi N, Wexner SD, Zmora O, Da Silva G, Efron J, Weiss EG, Vernava AM 3rd, Nogueras JJ. Endorectal advancement flap: are there predictors of failure? Dis Colon Rectum. 2002;45:1616-1621.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
22.  Van Koperen PJ, Wind J, Bemelman WA, Bakx R, Reitsma JB, Slors JF. Long-term functional outcome and risk factors for recurrence after surgical treatment for low and high perianal fistulas of cryptoglandular origin. Dis Colon Rectum. 2008;51:1475-1481.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
23.  Uribe N, Millán M, Minguez M, Ballester C, Asencio F, Sanchiz V, Esclapez P, del Castillo JR. Clinical and manometric results of endorectal advancement flaps for complex anal fistula. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2007;22:259-264.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
24.  Roig JV, García-Armengol J, Jordán JC, Moro D, García-Granero E, Alós R. Fistulectomy and sphincteric reconstruction for complex cryptoglandular fistulas. Colorectal Dis. 2010;12:e145-e152.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
25.  Hjortrup A, Moesgaard F, Kjaergård J. Fibrin adhesive in the treatment of perineal fistulas. Dis Colon Rectum. 1991;34:752-754.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
26.  Schwandner T, Roblick MH, Kierer W, Brom A, Padberg W, Hirschburger M. Surgical treatment of complex anal fistulas with the anal fistula plug: a prospective, multicenter study. Dis Colon Rectum. 2009;52:1578-1583.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
27.  A ba-bai-ke-re MM, Wen H, Huang HG, Chu H, Lu M, Chang ZS, Ai EH, Fan K. Randomized controlled trial of minimally invasive surgery using acellular dermal matrix for complex anorectal fistula. World J Gastroenterol. 2010;16:3279-3286.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
28.  The Surgisis AFP anal fistula plug: report of a consensus conference Colorectal Dis. 2008;10:17-20.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
29.  Schouten WR, van Vroonhoven TJ. Treatment of anorectal abscess with or without primary fistulectomy. Results of a prospective randomized trial. Dis Colon Rectum. 1991;34:60-63.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
30.  Ho YH, Tan M, Chui CH, Leong A, Eu KW, Seow-Choen F. Randomized controlled trial of primary fistulotomy with drainage alone for perianal abscesses. Dis Colon Rectum. 1997;40:1435-1438.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
31.  Sygut A, Mik M, Trzcinski R, Dziki A. How the location of the internal opening of anal fistulas affect the treatment results of primary transsphincteric fistulas. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2010;395:1055-1059.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
32.  Eisenhammer S. The final evaluation and classification of the surgical treatment of the primary anorectal cryptoglandular intermuscular (intersphincteric) fistulous abscess and fistula. Dis Colon Rectum. 1978;21:237-254.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]