Yee Chen Lau1,2, Kilian G M Brown3,4,5, Juyong Cheong3,4, Christopher Byrne3,4,5, Peter J Lee3,4,5. 1. Department of Colorectal Surgery, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, Australia. ychenlau@gmail.com. 2. Surgical Outcomes Research Centre (SOuRCe), Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, PO Box M157, Missenden Road, Sydney, NSW, 2050, Australia. ychenlau@gmail.com. 3. Department of Colorectal Surgery, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, Australia. 4. Surgical Outcomes Research Centre (SOuRCe), Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, PO Box M157, Missenden Road, Sydney, NSW, 2050, Australia. 5. The Institute of Academic Surgery at RPA, Sydney, Australia.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess the outcome of ligation of intersphincteric fistula tract (LIFT) and bioprosthetic graft (BioLIFT) in the management of transsphincteric perianal fistula. METHODS: A single-institution retrospective analysis of all patients undergoing LIFT and BioLIFT from January 2009 to June 2018 was performed. Only patients who had LIFTs and BioLIFT performed as their primary sphincter-preserving procedure was included. Primary outcome measured was primary healing. Secondary outcomes measured were secondary healing, morbidity, time to recurrence, and pre- and post-operative anorectal manometry. Chi-square analysis was used to determine predictive factors. RESULTS: A total of 116 patients were identified. One hundred five had LIFT and 11 had BioLIFT. The total primary healing rate was 60.3% (62.9% and 34.9% for LIFT and BioLIFT respectively). The overall secondary healing rate was 80.2% (80.0% and 81.9% for LIFT and BioLIFT respectively). There was no inpatient morbidity or post-procedural faecal incontinence reported. There was no significant change in the pre- and post-operative manometries in either group (P = 0.417 and P = 0.834 for LIFT and BioLIFT respectively). The only predictor for primary failure identified was anteriorly located fistula. CONCLUSION: LIFT and BioLIFT compare favourably with other sphincter-preserving procedures. LIFT and BioLIFT can be performed safely, with minimal morbidity and with no reported loss of sphincteric function.
PURPOSE: To assess the outcome of ligation of intersphincteric fistula tract (LIFT) and bioprosthetic graft (BioLIFT) in the management of transsphincteric perianal fistula. METHODS: A single-institution retrospective analysis of all patients undergoing LIFT and BioLIFT from January 2009 to June 2018 was performed. Only patients who had LIFTs and BioLIFT performed as their primary sphincter-preserving procedure was included. Primary outcome measured was primary healing. Secondary outcomes measured were secondary healing, morbidity, time to recurrence, and pre- and post-operative anorectal manometry. Chi-square analysis was used to determine predictive factors. RESULTS: A total of 116 patients were identified. One hundred five had LIFT and 11 had BioLIFT. The total primary healing rate was 60.3% (62.9% and 34.9% for LIFT and BioLIFT respectively). The overall secondary healing rate was 80.2% (80.0% and 81.9% for LIFT and BioLIFT respectively). There was no inpatient morbidity or post-procedural faecal incontinence reported. There was no significant change in the pre- and post-operative manometries in either group (P = 0.417 and P = 0.834 for LIFT and BioLIFT respectively). The only predictor for primary failure identified was anteriorly located fistula. CONCLUSION: LIFT and BioLIFT compare favourably with other sphincter-preserving procedures. LIFT and BioLIFT can be performed safely, with minimal morbidity and with no reported loss of sphincteric function.
Entities:
Keywords:
BioLIFT; LIFT; Ligation of intersphincteric tract; Perianal fistula