Pravin J Gupta1. 1. Gupta Nursing Home, Nagpur, India. drpjg@yahoo.co.in
Abstract
PURPOSE: Most surgeons continue to prefer the classic lay open technique [fistulotomy] as the gold standard of treatment in anal fistula. In this randomized study, a comparison is made between conventional fistulotomy and fistulotomy performed by a radio frequency device. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred patients of low anal fistula posted for fistulotomy were randomized prospectively to either a conventional or radio frequency technique. Parameters measured included time taken for the procedure, amount of blood loss, postoperative pain, return to work, and recurrence rate. RESULTS: The patient demographic was comparable in 2 groups. The radio frequency fistulotomy was quicker as compared to a conventional one [22 versus 37 minutes, p = 0.001], amount of bleeding was significantly less [47 ml versus 134 ml, p = 0.002], and hospital stay was less when patient was operated by radio frequency method [37 hours versus 56 hours in conventional method, p = 0.001]. The postoperative pain in the first 24 hours was more in conventional group [2 to 5 versus 0 to 3 on visual analogue scale]. The patients from radio frequency group resumed their duties early with a reduced healing period of the wounds [47 versus 64 days, p = 0.01]. The recurrence or failure rates were comparable in the radio frequency and conventional groups [2% versus 6%]. CONCLUSIONS: Fistulotomy procedure using a radio frequency technique has significant advantages over a conventional procedure with regard to operation time, blood loss, return to normal activity, and healing time of the wound.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: Most surgeons continue to prefer the classic lay open technique [fistulotomy] as the gold standard of treatment in anal fistula. In this randomized study, a comparison is made between conventional fistulotomy and fistulotomy performed by a radio frequency device. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred patients of low anal fistula posted for fistulotomy were randomized prospectively to either a conventional or radio frequency technique. Parameters measured included time taken for the procedure, amount of blood loss, postoperative pain, return to work, and recurrence rate. RESULTS: The patient demographic was comparable in 2 groups. The radio frequency fistulotomy was quicker as compared to a conventional one [22 versus 37 minutes, p = 0.001], amount of bleeding was significantly less [47 ml versus 134 ml, p = 0.002], and hospital stay was less when patient was operated by radio frequency method [37 hours versus 56 hours in conventional method, p = 0.001]. The postoperative pain in the first 24 hours was more in conventional group [2 to 5 versus 0 to 3 on visual analogue scale]. The patients from radio frequency group resumed their duties early with a reduced healing period of the wounds [47 versus 64 days, p = 0.01]. The recurrence or failure rates were comparable in the radio frequency and conventional groups [2% versus 6%]. CONCLUSIONS: Fistulotomy procedure using a radio frequency technique has significant advantages over a conventional procedure with regard to operation time, blood loss, return to normal activity, and healing time of the wound.
Authors: A Amato; C Bottini; P De Nardi; P Giamundo; A Lauretta; A Realis Luc; G Tegon; R J Nicholls Journal: Tech Coloproctol Date: 2015-09-16 Impact factor: 3.781
Authors: A Amato; C Bottini; P De Nardi; P Giamundo; A Lauretta; A Realis Luc; V Piloni Journal: Tech Coloproctol Date: 2020-01-23 Impact factor: 3.781