Literature DB >> 17279298

Muscle interposition in patients with fistulas between the rectum and urethra or vagina.

Daniëlla M J Oom, Martijn P Gosselink, W Rudolph Schouten.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17279298      PMCID: PMC1914223          DOI: 10.1007/s10350-006-0840-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum        ISSN: 0012-3706            Impact factor:   4.585


× No keyword cloud information.
To the Editor—We have read with great interest the article by Zmora et al.1 concerning gracilis muscle interposition for surgical repair of a rectovaginal or rectourethral fistula. In the past, several techniques have been described for the treatment of these fistulas, often with rather disappointing results. It has been suggested that interposition of healthy, well-vascularized tissue may be the key to rectovaginal fistula healing. Zmora et al.1 performed gracilis muscle interposition in nine patients with a rectovaginal or rectourethral fistula. All patients underwent fecal diversion before or at the time of the procedure. In seven patients, the fistula healed after gracilis muscle interposition at a median follow-up time of 14 months after stoma closure. In a recent study2 conducted in our institution, we encountered a rather disappointing low overall healing rate of 62 percent in 26 females who underwent puborectal sling interposition for the treatment of their rectovaginal fistula. The median duration of follow-up was 14 months. In all but one patient this procedure was performed without covering ileostomy. The question is whether such a covering ileostomy should be created in all patients undergoing rectovaginal fistula repair. It has been reported that a successful outcome can be achieved without the use of a protecting stoma.3–5 It is difficult to determine whether fecal diversion ameliorates the outcome, because fecal diversion often is used in the most difficult cases. Another aspect of muscle interposition is the risk of postoperative dyspareunia. In our study, 57 percent of the females without painful intercourse before the operation reported painful intercourse after the procedure. It is not clear whether Zmora et al.1 encountered this side effect of muscle interposition. Because postoperative dyspareunia has a substantial influence on quality of life, more studies are warranted to investigate the incidence of dyspareunia after muscle interposition.
  5 in total

1.  Gracilis muscle transposition for fistulas between the rectum and urethra or vagina.

Authors:  Osnat Zmora; Hagit Tulchinsky; Eyal Gur; Gideon Goldman; Joseph M Klausner; Micha Rabau
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 4.585

2.  Puborectal sling interposition for the treatment of rectovaginal fistulas.

Authors:  D M J Oom; M P Gosselink; V R M Van Dijl; D D E Zimmerman; W R Schouten
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2006-06-19       Impact factor: 3.781

3.  Endorectal advancement flap for treatment of simple rectovaginal fistula.

Authors:  D A Rothenberger; C E Christenson; E G Balcos; J L Schottler; F D Nemer; S Nivatvongs; S M Goldberg
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  1982 May-Jun       Impact factor: 4.585

4.  Repair of simple rectovaginal fistulas. Influence of previous repairs.

Authors:  A C Lowry; A G Thorson; D A Rothenberger; S M Goldberg
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  1988-09       Impact factor: 4.585

5.  Non-inflammatory rectovaginal fistula.

Authors:  S J Watson; R K Phillips
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1995-12       Impact factor: 6.939

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.