Literature DB >> 33963945

Heterogeneity in outcome selection, definition and measurement in studies assessing the treatment of cryptoglandular anal fistula: findings from a systematic review.

A J H M Machielsen1,2, N Iqbal3,4, M L Kimman5, K Sahnan6,7, S O Adegbola6,7, G Kane8, R Woodcock9, J Kleijnen10, U Grossi11, S O Breukink12, P J Tozer6,7.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Treatment for cryptoglandular anal fistula (AF) is challenging and a lack of uniform outcomes in the literature prevents direct comparison of treatments. This can be addressed by developing a core outcome set, a standardised set of outcomes reported in all interventional studies for a specific condition. The aim of this systematic review is to assess the range of outcomes, their definitions, and the measurement instruments currently utilised in interventional studies for adult patients with AF. This will inform the development of an AF core outcome set.
METHODS: Medline, Embase and The Cochrane Library were searched to identify all patient- and clinician-reported outcomes in studies assessing medical, surgical or combination treatment of adult patients with AF published from January 2008 to May 2020. The resulting outcomes were categorized according to the Core Outcome Measurement in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) taxonomy to better understand their distribution.
RESULTS: In total, 155 studies were included, 552 outcomes were extracted, with a median of three outcomes (interquartile range 2-5) per study. Only 25% of studies demonstrated high-quality outcome reporting. The outcomes were merged into 52 unique outcomes and structured into four core areas and 14 domains, with the majority in the domain of physiological or clinical (gastrointestinal) outcomes. The most commonly reported outcomes were healing (77%), incontinence (63%), and recurrence (40%), with no single outcome assessed across all studies. There was a wide variation in outcome definitions and measurement instruments used.
CONCLUSIONS: There is substantial heterogeneity in outcomes, definitions, and measurement instruments reported in interventional studies for cryptoglandular anal fistula. This emphasises the need for standardised outcome reporting and measurement.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Core outcome set; Cryptoglandular anal fistula; Outcome assessment; Systematic review

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33963945      PMCID: PMC8187216          DOI: 10.1007/s10151-021-02452-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Tech Coloproctol        ISSN: 1123-6337            Impact factor:   3.781


Introduction

Cryptoglandular anal fistula (AF) is a challenging condition to manage. The symptom burden can be severe and can have wide-ranging impact on physical functioning and quality of life [1]. For clinicians, the difficulties of balancing treatment efficacy with minimal impairment of continence have been well documented [2, 3], particularly for complex and recurrent cases. In an attempt to address the dichotomy in achieving these key treatment aims, numerous sphincter-preserving procedures have been developed in recent decades. These procedures have now made their way into common clinical practice, leading to wide variation in the techniques used according to surgical expertise, preference, and geographical area [4]. Along with the expansion of procedures, numerous interventional studies have been conducted to assess success rates and determine treatment superiority. Attempts have been made to meta-analyse data from multiple studies, however, difficulties in doing so reliably are frequently reported, due to inadequate follow-up, lack of randomized controlled trials, and non-uniform reporting of outcomes [4-6]. This limits the development of treatment guidelines for AF. The selection of relevant and appropriate outcomes is crucial to any study on treatment effectiveness [7], however, the lack of a systematic approach results in the reporting of numerous outcomes with varied definitions, multiple measurement instruments, and inconsistencies in the timing of assessment. Furthermore, selective reporting of outcomes based on significant results is a recognised problem and can overestimate the size of the treatment effect [8, 9]. Such outcome reporting bias can lead to ill-informed decisions with the potential to cause patient harm [10]. One way of addressing such issues is to develop a core outcome set (COS); an agreed, standardised set of outcomes to be measured in all interventional studies for a specific health condition [9]. The importance and value of a COS in disease areas with heterogeneity in outcome reporting is being increasingly recognised. However, a COS has not yet been developed for cryptoglandular AF. We believe that this is an important step in addressing the challenges in developing evidence-based management strategies. According to the Core Outcome Measurement in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) initiative, the first stage in the development of a COS is to determine what to measure, which can be partially achieved by identifying potential outcomes from the existing literature [7]. The primary aim of this systematic review was to identify all patient- and clinician-reported outcomes in studies assessing medical, surgical or combination treatment of adult patients with cryptoglandular AF, to inform the development of a cryptoglandular Anal Fistula Core Outcome Set (AFCOS) [11]. The secondary aim is to assess outcome definitions and identify the measurement instruments used.

Materials and methods

A systematic review of studies assessing medical, surgical, and combined interventions for cryptoglandular AF was performed in accordance with a registered protocol (PROSPERO-ID CRD42018102778).

Search strategy

An electronic search strategy was developed by an information specialist prior to execution. The following electronic databases were searched, adjusting vocabulary and syntax for each: Medline (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), and The Cochrane Library. Validated terms for ‘Perianal Fistula’ were used, ensuring that all interventional studies for AF could be captured. If MeSH terms or subject headings existed, these were included in the search strategy and supplemented with free-text searches of the same databases. To avoid limiting the scope of outcomes identified, no study design filter was applied. The search was restricted to full-text articles in English published from January 2008 to May 2020 and to studies conducted in human subjects aged ≥ 18 years. The full search strategy can be found in Table 1.
Table 1

Search strategy

Embase (Ovid)
 1Anus fistula/
 2Rectum fistula/
 3((Anus or anal or anorectal or rectal or rectum or perianal) adj4 fistul*).m_titl
 4Fistula ani.m_titl
 5Fistula-in-ano.m_titl
 61 or 2 or 3 or 4 or 5
 7Limit 6 to (full text and human and year = “2008–current”)
The Cochrane library
 1MeSH descriptor: (rectal fistula) this term only
 2(Anus or anal or anorectal or rectal or rectum or perianal) near/4 (fistul*):ti
 3Fistula ani:ti
 4Fistula-in-ano:ti
 5#1 or #2 or #3 or #4
Publication date from January 2008 to May 2020
Medline (Ovid)
 1Rectal fistula/
 2((Anus or anal or anorectal or rectal or rectum or perianal) adj4 fistul*).m_titl
 3Fistula ani.m_titl
 4Fistula-in-ano.m_titl
 51 or 2 or 3 or 4
 6Limit 5 to (full text and humans and year = “2008–current”)
Search strategy

Study selection

Four members of the study management group (AM, NI, KS, SA) identified and screened titles and abstracts using Covidence Systematic Review Software (Veritas Health Innovation, Melbourne, Australia, available at https://www.covidence.org/home), with each abstract and full-text publication screened by two independent group members. The following predefined selection criteria were used: (1) Prospective [including randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cohort comparisons, case controls and case series], retrospective, and observational studies including ≥ 10 patients and systematic reviews published between January 2008 and May 2020; (2) including ≥ 10 adult patients (aged ≥ 18 years) with cryptoglandular AF; (3) assessing medical, surgical, or combined interventions for cryptoglandular AF; (4) and reporting ≥ one outcome. Studies were excluded if they were abstract only or if they reported on interventions that were only assessed on fistulas that were not perianal or not of cryptoglandular origin. Systematic reviews were included and individual studies were checked for eligibility. Disagreements were resolved through discussion with recourse to the senior authors (PT, SB) if necessary.

Data extraction

Two members of the study management group (AM, NI) extracted data from eligible studies using a predefined data extraction sheet created in Microsoft Excel. Extracted data included study publication year, design, interventions, patients, outcomes (primary and secondary), outcome definitions and measurement instruments used. In keeping with COMET recommendations, all data were extracted verbatim [7]. The quality of describing and reporting outcomes was assessed using Harman’s criteria [12], which are presented in (Table 2). Disagreements were resolved through discussion with recourse to the senior authors (PT, SB) if necessary.
Table 2

Overview of the included studies

First authorTitleYear of publicationStudy designIntervention(s)Number of participantsNumber of outcome(s)Primary outcome clearly stated?Primary outcome clearly defined?Secondary outcomes clearly stated?Secondary outcomes clearly defined?The use of the selected outcomes explained?Methods used to enhance the quality of outcome measurement?
A ba-bai-ke-reRandomized controlled trial of minimally invasive surgery using acellular dermal matrix for complex anorectal fistula2010RCT

ADM

ERAF

906YesYesYesYesNoYes
AbcarianLigation of intersphincteric fistula tract: early results of a pilot study2012Prospective studyLIFT procedure403YesNoYesNoNoNo
AbdelnabyDrained mucosal advancement flap versus rerouting seton around the internal anal sphincter in treatment of high trans-sphincteric anal fistula: a randomized trial2019RCT

Advancement flap and drainage seton around EAS

Seton around IAS

976YesYesYesYesNoNo
AboulianEarly result of ligation of the intersphincteric fistula tract for fistula-in-ano2011Retrospective reviewLIFT procedure255YesNoYesNoNoNo
AdamsLong-term outlook after successful fibrin glue ablation of cryptoglandular transsphincteric fistula-in-ano2008Retrospective reviewFibrin glue362YesNoYesNoNoNo
AdaminaTo plug or not to plug: a cost-effectiveness analysis for complex anal fistula2010Prospective study

AFP

ERAF

242YesYesN/AN/AYesNo
AltomareSeton or glue for trans-sphincteric anal fistulae: a prospective randomized crossover clinical trial2011RCT

Fibrin glue

Seton

645YesNoYesYesNoNo
AlvandipourEfficacy of 10% sucralfate ointment after anal fistulotomy: a prospective, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial2016RCT

Fistulotomy and 10% sucralfate

Fistulotomy and placebo

412YesYesYesYesNoNo
AnanFistulotomy with or without marsupialisation of wound edges in treatment of simple anal fistula: a randomised controlled trial2019RCT

Fistulotomy

Fistulotomy and marsupialization

605YesYesYesYesNoNo
ArawattiStandardization and clinical evaluation of nimba ksharsutra in the management of bhagandar (fistula in ano)2012RCT

Seton

Seton

405YesYesNoN/ANoNo
ArroyoPhotodynamic therapy for the treatment of complex anal fistula2017Prospective studyPhotodynamic therapy104YesYesYesYesNoNo
ArroyoFistulotomy and sphincter reconstruction in the treatment of complex fistula-in-ano: long-term clinical and manometric results2012Prospective studyFISR702YesNoYesNoNoYes
AtkinFor many high anal fistulas, lay open is still a good option2011Retrospective review

EUA

Drainage of abscess

Fistulotomy (and marsupialization)

Seton

Fibrin glue

Advancement flap

Transperineal core-out and repair

Martius flap

Sphincter repair

Defunctioning stoma

Proctectomy and permanent colostomy

1803YesNoYesNoNoNo
AttaallahShould we consider topical silver nitrate irrigation as a definitive nonsurgical treatment for perianal fistula2014Prospective studyIrrigation and 1% silver nitrate563YesYesYesYesNoYes
BleierLigation of the intersphincteric fistula tract: an effective new technique for complex fistulas2010Retrospective reviewLIFT procedure393YesNoYesNoNoNo
BoenickeAdvancement flap for treatment of complex cryptoglandular anal fistula: prediction of therapy success or failure using anamnestic and clinical parameters2017Prospective studyAdvancement flap612YesYesYesYesNoNo
BondiRandomized clinical trial comparing collagen plug and advancement flap for transsphincteric anal fistula2017RCT

AFP

Advancement flap

944YesYesYesYesNoYes
BrowderModified Hanley procedure for management of complex horseshoe fistulae2009Retrospective reviewModified Hanley procedure, drainage and setons234YesNoYesNoNoNo
ChalyaFistulectomy versus fistulotomy with marsupialisation in the treatment of low fistula-in-ano: a prospective randomized controlled trial2013RCT

Fistulectomy

Fistulotomy and marsupialization

1629YesYesYesYesNoNo
ChanInitial experience of treating anal fistula with the Surgisis anal fistula plug2012Prospective studyAFP442YesYesYesNoNoNo
ChenHigh ligation of the fistula track by lateral approach: a modified sphincter-saving technique for advanced anal fistulas2012Prospective studyModified LIFT procedure104NoN/ANoN/AYesNo
ChowbeyMinimally invasive anal fistula treatment (MAFT)—an appraisal of early results in 416 patients2015Prospective studyMAFT4163YesNoNoN/ANoNo
ChungAnal fistula plug and fibrin glue versus conventional treatment in repair of complex anal fistulas2009Retrospective review

AFP

Fibrin glue

Advancement flap

Seton

2321YesYesN/AN/ANoNo
ChoiPatient-performed seton irrigation for the treatment of deep horseshoe fistula2010Retrospective review

Seton

Seton

244YesYesNoN/ANoNo
ChoiAutologous adipose tissue-derived stem cells for the treatment of complex perianal fistulas not associated with Crohn’s disease: a phase II clinical trial for safety and efficacy2017Prospective studyASC155YesYesYesYesNoYes
ChristoforidisTreatment of complex anal fistulas with the collagen fistula plug2008Retrospective reviewAFP471YesNoN/AN/ANoNo
ChristoforidisTreatment of transsphincteric anal fistulas by endorectal advancement flap or collagen fistula plug: a comparative study2009Retrospective reviewERAFAFP803YesYesYesYesNoNo
CintronTreatment of fistula-in-ano using a porcine small intestinal submucosa anal fistula plug2013Prospective studyAFP732YesYesYesYesNoNo
DaoduDraining setons as definitive management of fistula-in-ano2018Retrospective studySeton762YesYesNoN/ANoNo
De La PortillaPlatelet-rich plasma (PRP) versus fibrin glue in cryptogenic fistula-in-ano: a phase III single-center, randomized, double-blind trial2019RCT

PRP

Fibrin glue

565YesYesYesNoNoYes
De La PortillaTreatment of transsphincteric fistula-in-ano with growth factors from autologous platelets: results of a phase II clinical trial2017Prospective studyPRGF365YesYesNoN/ANoNo
De La PortillaEvaluation of a new synthetic plug in the treatment of anal fistulas: results of a pilot study2011Prospective studyAFP194YesNoNoN/ANoNo
DubskyEndorectal advancement flaps in the treatment of high anal fistula of cryptoglandular origin: full thickness vs mucosal rectum flaps2008Retrospective review

Advancement flap

Advancement flap

542NoN/ANoN/ANoNo
DozoisEarly results of a phase I trial using an adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cell-coated fistula plug for the treatment of transsphincteric cryptoglandular fistulas2019Prospective studyAFP153YesNoYesYesNoYes
EgeHybrid seton for the treatment of high anal fistulas: results of 128 consecutive patients2014Retrospective reviewSeton1285YesNoNoN/ANoNo
EitanThe use of the loose seton technique as a definitive treatment for recurrent and persistent high trans-sphincteric anal fistulas: a long-term outcome2009Retrospective reviewSeton413YesYesNoN/ANoNo
EllisOutcomes with the use of bioprosthetic grafts to reinforce the ligation of the intersphincteric fistula tract (BioLIFT procedure) for the management of complex anal fistulas2010Retrospective reviewBioLIFT procedure312YesYesN/AN/ANoNo
EllisLong-term outcomes with the use of bioprosthetic plugs for the management of complex anal fistulas2010Retrospective reviewAFP631YesNoNoN/ANoNo
FabianiPermacol collagen paste injection for the treatment of complex anal fistula: 1-year follow-up2017Prospective studyCollagen paste injection213YesNoYesNoNoNo
FungOperative strategy for fistula-in-ano without diversion of the anal sphincter2013Retrospective reviewPartial fistulotomy and seton463YesYesYesYesNoYes
Garcia-ArranzAutologous adipose-derived stem cells for the treatment of complex cryptoglandular perianal fistula: a randomized clinical trial with long-term follow-up2020RCT

ASC and fibrin glue

Fibrin glue

574YesYesN/AN/ANoYes
Garcia-OlmoExpanded adipose-derived stem cells for the treatment of complex perianal fistula: a phase II clinical trial2009RCTFibrin glueFibrin glue and ASC494YesNoNoN/ANoNo
GargPERFACT procedure (Proximal superficial cauterization, emptying regularly of fistula tracts and curettage of tracts): A new concept to treat highly complex anal fistula2015Prospective studyPERFACT procedure513YesNoNoN/ANoNo
GargTo determine the efficacy of anal fistula plug in the treatment of high fistula-in-ano: an initial experience2009Prospective studyAFP217NoN/ANoN/ANoNo
GautierEasy clip to treat anal fistula tracts: a word of caution2015Retrospective studyClip1710YesNoNoN/ANoNo
GiamundoFistula-tract laser closure (FiLaC): long-term results and new operative strategies2015Retrospective studyFiLaC455YesYesYesYesNoNo
GottgensLigation of the intersphincteric fistula tract for high transsphincteric fistula yields moderate results at best: is the tide turning?2019Retrospective study

LIFT

BioLIFT

465YesYesYesNoNoNo
GottgensLong-term results of mucosal advancement flap combined with platelet-rich plasma for high cryptoglandular perianal fistulas2014Retrospective studyAdvancement flap and platelet-rich plasma252YesYesYesYesNoNo
GrolichRole of video-assisted anal fistula treatment in our management of fistula-in-ano2014Retrospective reviewVAAFT302YesNoNoN/ANoNo
GuptaTopical sucralfate treatment of anal fistulotomy wounds: a randomized placebo-controlled trial2011RCT

Fistulotomy and 7% sucralfate

Fistulotomy and placebo

803YesYesYesYesNoNo
HaimLong-term results of fibrin glue treatment for cryptogenic perianal fistulas: a multicenter study2011Retrospective reviewFibrin glue233YesYesYesYesNoYes
HallOutcomes after operations for anal fistula: results of a prospective, multicenter, regional study2014Retrospective review

Fistulotomy

LIFT procedure

Seton

Advancement flap

AFP

2402YesNoNoN/ANoNo
HammondManagement of idiopathic anal fistula using cross-linked collagen: a prospective phase 1 study2011Prospective study

Collagen paste injection

Fibrin glue

296YesYesYesYesNoNo
HanLigation of intersphincteric fistula tract vs ligation of the intersphincteric fistula tract plus a bioprosthetic anal fistula plug procedure in patients with transsphincteric anal fistula: early results of a multicenter prospective randomized trial2016RCT

LIFT procedure

LIPT-plug procedure

2375YesYesNoN/ANoNo
HanLong-term outcomes of human acellular dermal matrix plug in closure of complex anal fistulas with a single tract2011Retrospective studyADM1142YesYesNoN/ANoNo
HanLigation of the intersphincteric fistula tract plus bioprosthetic anal fistula plug (LIFT-Plug): a new technique for fistula-in-ano2013Prospective studyLIFT-plug procedure213YesYesYesYesNoNo
HeroldResults of the Gore Bio-a fistula plug implantation in the treatment of anal fistula: a multicentre study2016Prospective studyAFP606YesYesYesYesNoYes
HerrerosAutologous expanded adipose-derived stem cells for the treatment of complex cryptoglandular perianal fistulas: a phase III randomized clinical trial (FATT 1: fistula advanced therapy trial 1) and long-term evaluation2012RCT

ASC

ASC and fibrin glue

Fibrin glue

1834YesYesNoN/ANoNo
HirschburgerFistulectomy with primary sphincter reconstruction in the treatment of high transsphincteric anal fistulas2014Retrospective reviewFISR504NoN/ANoN/ANoNo
HanLigation of the intersphincteric fistula tract plus a bioprosthetic anal fistula plug (LIFT‐plug): a new technique for fistula‐in‐ano2013Prospective studyLIFT-plug procedure465NoN/AYesNoNoNo
HeydariBioabsorbable synthetic plug in the treatment of anal fistulas2013Retrospective reviewAFP483YesNoNoN/ANoNo
HymanOutcomes after fistulotomy: results of a prospective, multicenter regional study2009Prospective study

Fistulotomy

Seton

Fistulotomy

AFP

Fibrin glue

Advancement flap

2453YesYesYesYesNoNo
JainComparison of a fistulectomy and a fistulotomy with marsupialization in the management of a simple anal fistula: a randomized, controlled pilot trial2012RCT

Fistulectomy

Fistulotomy and marsupialization

409YesNoNoN/ANoNo
JivapaisarnpongCore out fistulectomy, anal sphincter reconstruction and primary repair of internal opening in the treatment of complex anal fistula2009Prospective studyFISR334NoN/ANoN/ANoNo
JarrarAdvancement flap repair: a good option for complex anorectal fistulas2011Retrospective studyAdvancement flap983YesNoYesNoNoNo
JayneAnal fistula plug versus surgeon’s preference for surgery for transsphincteric anal fistula: the FIAT RCT2019RCT

AFP

Surgeon’s preference (fistulotomy, seton, advancement flap or LIFT)

3046YesYesYesNoYesNo
JiangVideo-assisted anal fistula treatment (VAAFT) for complex anal fistula: a preliminary evaluation in China2017Retrospective reviewVAAFT524YesYesNoN/ANoNo
KalimComparison of mean healing time and mean pain scores between fistulectomy and fistulotomy for the treatment of low fistula in ano2017RCT

Fistulectomy

Fistulotomy

3043YesNoYesNoNoNo
KyCollagen fistula plug for the treatment of anal fistulas2008Prospective studyAFP453YesYesNoN/ANoNo
KellyThe role of loose seton in the management of anal fistula: a multicenter study of 200 patients2014Retrospective reviewSeton2003YesNoNoN/ANoNo
KhafagyTreatment of anal fistulas by partial rectal wall advancement flap or mucosal advancement flap: a prospective randomized study2010Prospective study

Advancement flap

Advancement flap

405YesNoNoN/ANoNo
KochharVideo-assisted anal fistula treatment2014Retrospective reviewVAAFT825YesYesYesYesNoNo
LaraPlatelet-rich fibrin sealant as a treatment for complex perianal fistulas: a multicentre study2015Prospective studyPRF603YesYesNoN/ANoYes
LawesEarly experience with the bioabsorbable anal fistula plug2008Retrospective reviewAFP202YesNoNoN/ANoNo
LeventogluTreatment for horseshoe fistula with the modified Hanley procedure using a hybrid seton: results of 21 cases2013Prospective studyModified Hanley procedure217YesNoYesNoNoYes
LiuLong-term results of ligation of intersphincteric fistula tract (LIFT) for fistula-in-ano2013Retrospective reviewLIFT procedure385YesYesNoN/ANoNo
LupinacciTreatment of fistula-in-ano with the Surgisis AFP anal fistula plug2010Prospective studyAFP152YesYesYesYesNoNo
LoLigation of intersphincteric fistula tract procedure for the management of cryptoglandular anal fistulas2012Prospective studyLIFT procedure255YesYesNoN/ANoNo
LehmanEfficacy of LIFT for recurrent anal fistula2013Prospective studyLIFT procedure172NoN/ANoN/AYesNo
LoboA comparative clinical study of Snuhi Ksheera Sutra, Tilanala Kshara Sutra and Apamarga Kshara Sutra in Bhagandara (fistula in ano)2012Prospective study

Seton

Seton

Seton

333YesYesNoN/ANoNo
MadboulyLigation of intersphincteric fistula tract versus mucosal advancement flap in patients with high transsphincteric fistula-in-ano: a prospective randomized trial2014RCT

LIFT procedure

Advancement flap

706YesYesYesNoNoNo
MalakornLigation of intersphincteric fistula tract for fistula in ano: lessons learned from a decade of experience2017Retrospective reviewLIFT procedure2511YesYesN/AN/ANoNo
MansourMedical interventional treatment of adult fistula-in-ano. A pilot study for curative response of intra-tract injections of Ceftazidine and Metronidazol2016RCTCeftazidime and Metronidazole injection252NoN/ANoN/ANoNo
MascagniOTSC proctology vs. fistulectomy and primary sphincter reconstruction as a treatment for low trans-sphincteric anal fistula in a randomized controlled pilot trial2019Retrospective study

Clip

Fistulectomy

303NoN/ANoN/ANoNo
MascagniTotal fistulectomy, sphincteroplasty and closure of the residual cavity for transsphincteric perianal fistula in the elderly patient2017Retrospective reviewFISR866NoN/ANoN/ANoNo
McGeeTract length predicts successful closure with anal fistula plug in cryptoglandular fistulas2010Prospective studyAFP412YesNoNoN/ANoNo
MeineroVideo-assisted anal fistula treatment: a novel sphincter-saving procedure for treating complex anal fistulas2011Retrospective reviewVAAFT1363NoN/ANoN/ANoNo
MeineroVideo-assisted anal fistula treatment: a new concept of treating anal fistulas2014Retrospective reviewVAAFT2035NoN/ANoN/ANoNo
MennigenThe OTSC proctology clip system for the closure of refractory anal fistulas2015Retrospective reviewClip104YesYesNoN/ANoNo
MishraThe role of fibrin glue in the treatment of high and low fistulas in ano2013Prospective studyFibrin glue304NoN/ANoN/ANoNo
MitalasDoes rectal mucosal blood flow affect the outcome of transanal advancement flap repair?2009Prospective studyAdvancement flap543NoN/ANoN/AYesNo
MushayaLigation of intersphincteric fistula tract compared with advancement flap for complex anorectal fistulas requiring initial seton drainage2012RCT

LIFT procedure

Advancement flap

396NoN/ANoN/ANoYes
NazeerBetter option for the patients of low fistula in ano: fistulectomy or fistulotomy2012RCT

Fistulotomy

Fistulectomy

1505NoN/ANoN/ANoNo
Nordholm-CarstensenTreatment of complex fistula-in-ano with nitinol proctology clip2017Retrospective reviewClip352YesYesYesYesYesNo
OmarDrainage seton versus external anal sphincter-sparing seton after rerouting of the fistula tract in the treatment of complex anal fistula: a randomized controlled trial2019RCT

Seton

Rerouting of fistula tract and seton around internal anal sphincter

606YesYesYesYesNoNo
OmmerGore BioA fistula plug in the treatment of high anal fistulas - initial results from a German multicenter-study2012Retrospective reviewAFP401NoN/AN/AN/AYesNo
OrtizRandomized clinical trial of anal fistula plug versus endorectal advancement flap for the treatment of high cryptoglandular fistula in ano2009RCT

AFP

ERAF

322YesNoYesYesYesNo
OrtizLength of follow‐up after fistulotomy and fistulectomy associated with endorectal advancement flap repair for fistula in ano2008Prospective study

Fistulotomy

Fistulectomy and ERAF

2062NoN/ANoN/ANoNo
OwenPlugs unplugged. Anal fistula plug: the Concord experience2010Retrospective reviewAFP321YesYesN/AN/ANoNo
OoiManaging fistula‐in‐ano with ligation of the intersphincteric fistula tract procedure: the Western Hospital experience2012Prospective studyLIFT procedure252YesYesYesYesYesNo
OzturkTreatment of recurrent anal fistula using an autologous cartilage plug: a pilot study2015Prospective studyAFP105NoN/ANoN/AYesNo
OzturkLaser ablation of fistula tract: a sphincter-preserving method for treating fistula-in-ano2014Retrospective reviewLaser ablation371YesYesN/AN/AYesNo
ProsstShort-term outcomes of a novel endoscopic clipping device for closure of the internal opening in 100 anorectal fistulas2016Retrospective reviewClip962NoN/ANoN/ANoNo
RattoFistulotomy with end-to-end primary sphincteroplasty for anal fistula: results from a prospective study2013Prospective studyFISR722NoN/ANoN/ANoNo
RoigChanges in anorectal morphologic and functional parameters after fistula-in-ano surgery2009Prospective study

Fistulotomy

FISR

Seton

Fistulectomy and advancement flap

1204NoN/ANoN/AYesNo
RoigFistulectomy and sphincteric reconstruction for complex cryptoglandular fistulas2010Retrospective review

ERAF

FISR

1467NoN/ANoN/ANoNo
SafarAnal fistula plug: initial experience and outcomes2009Retrospective reviewAFP351NoN/ANoN/AYesNo
SanadA randomized controlled trial on the effect of topical phenytoin 2% on wound healing after anal fistulotomy2019RCT

Fistulotomy and phenytoin

Fistulotomy

606YesYesYesYesNoNo
SchulzeManagement of complex anorectal fistulas with seton drainage plus partial fistulotomy and subsequent ligation of intersphincteric fistula tract (LIFT)2015Prospective study

Seton

Fistulotomy and LIFT procedure

755YesYesN/AN/ANoNo
SchwandnerSurgical treatment of complex anal fistulas with the anal fistula plug: a prospective, multicenter study2009Prospective studyAFP604NoN/ANoN/ANoNo
SchwandnerRandomized clinical trial comparing a small intestinal submucosa anal fistula plug to advancement flap for the repair of complex anal fistulas2018RCT

AFP

Advancement flap

825YesYesYesYesNoNo
SeneviratneQuality of life following surgery for recurrent fistula-in-ano2009Prospective study

Fistulotomy

Fistulectomy

Seton

211NoN/ANoN/ANoNo
Seow-EnAn experience with video-assisted anal fistula treatment (VAAFT) with new insights into the treatment of anal fistulae2016Retrospective reviewVAAFT413YesYesN/AN/AYesNo
ShafikCombined partial fistulectomy and electro-cauterization of the intersphincteric tract as a sphincter-sparing treatment of complex anal fistula: clinical and functional outcome2014Prospective studyFistulectomy and electro-cauterization534NoN/ANoN/ANoNo
ShanwaniLigation of the intersphincteric fistula tract (LIFT): a sphincter-saving technique for fistula-in-ano2010Prospective studyLIFT procedure454NoN/ANoN/ANoNo
SileriSurgery of fistula-in-ano in a specialist colorectal unit: a critical appraisal2011Prospective study

Seton

Fistulotomy

LIFT procedure

Advancement flap

2476NoN/ANoN/ANoNo
SileriLigation of the intersphincteric fistula tract (LIFT) to treat anal fistula: early results from a prospective observational study2011Prospective studyLIFT procedure184NoN/ANoN/ANoNo
StamosProspective multicenter study of a synthetic bioabsorbable anal fistula plug to treat cryptoglandular transsphincteric anal fistulas2015Prospective studyAFP935NoN/ANoN/ANoNo
StroumzaSurgical treatment of transsphincteric anal fistulas with the Fat GRAFT technique: a minimally invasive procedure2017Prospective studyFat grafting113YesYesYesNoYesNo
SugrueSphincter-sparing anal fistula repair: are we getting better?2017Retrospective review

LIFT procedure

Fibrin glue

Advancement flap

AFP

Advancement flap and AFP

Advancement flap and advancement flap

4621YesNoN/AN/AYesNo
ShanwariLigation of the intersphincteric fistula tract (LIFT): a sphincter-saving technique for fistula-in-ano2010Prospective studyLIFT procedure454YesYesNoN/ANoYes
SchwandnerInitial experience on efficacy in closure of cryptoglandular and Crohn’s transsphincteric fistula by the use of the anal fistula plug2008Prospective studyAFP193YesYesYesYesNoNo
SirikurnpiboonLigation of intersphincteric fistula tract and its modification: results from treatment of complex fistula2013Prospective study

LIFT procedure

LIFT procedure and fistulectomy

416NoN/ANoN/ANoNo
SungurtekinLoose seton: a misnomer of cutting seton2016Prospective studySeton503YesYesYesYesNoNo
TanTo LIFT or to flap? Which surgery to perform following seton insertion for high anal fistula?2012Retrospective review

ERAF

LIFT procedure

312NoN/ANoN/AYesNo
TanThe anatomy of failures following the ligation of intersphincteric tract technique for anal fistula: a review of 93 patients over 4 years2011Retrospective reviewLIFT procedure933NoN/ANoN/AYesNo
TerziClosing perianal fistulas using a laser: long-term results in 103 patients2018Retrospective reviewFiLaC1032NoN/ANoN/ANoNo
TobischTotal fistulectomy with simple closure of the internal opening in the management of complex cryptoglandular fistulas: long-term results and functional outcome2012Retrospective reviewFistulectomy and closure of internal opening2522NoN/ANoN/AYesNo
TokunagaClinical role of a modified seton technique for the treatment of trans-sphincteric and supra-sphincteric anal fistulas2013Retrospective reviewSeton2392NoN/ANoN/AYesYes
TozerFistulotomy in the tertiary setting can achieve high rates of fistula cure with an acceptable risk of deterioration in continence2013Retrospective reviewFistulotomy503NoN/ANoN/ANoNo
TanEarly experience of reinforcing the ligation of the intersphincteric fistula tract procedure with a bioprosthetic graft (BioLIFT) for anal fistula2014Retrospective studyBioLIFT procedure134NoN/ANoN/ANoNo
ThekkinkattilEfficacy of the anal fistula plug in complex anorectal fistulae2009Prospective studyAFP432YesYesNoN/ANoNo
TsunodaAnal function after ligation of the intersphincteric fistula tract2013Prospective studyLIFT procedure and seton203NoN/ANoN/AYesNo
Van KoperenThe anal fistula plug versus the mucosal advancement flap for the treatment of anorectal fistula (PLUG trial)2008RCT

AFP

Advancement flap

604NoN/ANoN/AYesNo
Van KoperenFibrin glue and transanal rectal advancement flap for high transsphincteric perianal fistulas; is there any advantage?2008Retrospective studyFibrin glue and advancement flap802YesYesYesNoYesNo
Van KoperenThe anal fistula plug treatment compared with the mucosal advancement flap for cryptoglandular high transsphincteric perianal fistula: a double-blinded multicenter randomized trial2011RCT

AFP

Advancement flap

605NoN/ANoN/ANoNo
Van KoperenLong-term functional outcome and risk factors for recurrence after surgical treatment for low and high perianal fistulas of cryptoglandular origin2008Retrospective review

Fistulotomy

Advancement flap

1793NoN/ANoN/ANoNo
Van OnkelenTreatment of anal fistulas with high intersphincteric extension2013Retrospective reviewAdvancement flap and drainage of abscess143NoN/ANoN/AYesNo
Van OnkelenIs it possible to improve the outcome of transanal advancement flap repair for high transsphincteric fistulas by additional ligation of the intersphincteric fistula tract?2012Prospective studyLIFT procedure and advancement flap412NoN/ANoN/AYesNo
Van OnkelenLigation of the intersphincteric fistula tract in low transsphincteric fistula: a new technique to avoid fistulotomy2013Retrospective studyLIFT procedure222YesYesNoN/ANoNo
Van OnkelenPredictors of outcome after transanal advancement flap repair for high transsphincteric fistulas2014Retrospective reviewAdvancement flap2522NoN/ANoN/AYesNo
VisscherLong-term follow-up after surgery for simple and complex cryptoglandular fistulas: fecal incontinence and impact on quality of life2015Retrospective study

Fistulotomy

Sphincter-preserving procedures

1162NoN/ANoN/AYesYes
WalegaVAAFT: a new minimally invasive method in the diagnostics and treatment of anal fistulas-initial results2014Prospective studyVAAFT185NoN/ANoN/ANoNo
WallinDoes ligation of the intersphincteric fistula tract raise the bar in fistula surgery?2012Retrospective reviewLIFT procedure934NoN/ANoN/ANoNo
WangTraditional Chinese surgical treatment for anal fistulae with secondary tracks and abscess2012RCT

Suture dragging and pad compression

Fistulotomy

606YesNoYesNoNoNo
WangManagement of low transsphincteric anal fistula with serial setons and interval muscle-cutting fistulotomy2016Retrospective study

Seton

Fistulotomy

262YesYesN/AN/ANoNo
WangTreatment of transsphincteric anal fistulas: are fistula plugs an acceptable alternative?2009Retrospective study

AFP

Advancement flap

551NoN/ANoN/ANoNo
WilhelmA new technique for sphincter-preserving anal fistula repair using a novel radial emitting laser probe2011Retrospective studyFiLaC112YesYesYesYesYesNo
WilhelmFive years of experience with the FiLaC laser for fistula-in-ano management: long-term follow-up from a single institution2017Prospective studyFiLaC1172NoN/ANoN/AYesNo
YanClinical effect of tunnel-like fistulectomy plus draining seton combined with incision of internal opening of anal fistula (TFSIA) in the treatment of high-transsphincteric anal fistula2020RCT

TFSIA

Seton

807NoN/ANoN/ANoNo
YeEarly experience with the modificated approach of ligation of the intersphincteric fistula tract for high transsphincteric fistula2015Retrospective reviewModified LIFT procedure433YesYesYesYesYesNo
YuanClinical study on herbal fumigation of detumescence and pain relieving shengji decoction in wound repair after anal fistula surgery2017RCT

Shengji decoction

Potassium permanganate

906NoN/ANoN/ANoNo
ZarinVAAFT: video-assisted anal fistula treatment: bringing revolution in fistula treatment2015Prospective studyVAAFT403YesYesN/AN/AYesNo
ZubaidiAnal fistula plug in high fistula-in-ano: an early Saudi experience2009Prospective studyAFP221YesNoNoN/ANoNo
ZwiepComparison of ligation of the intersphincteric fistula tract and BioLIFT for the treatment of transsphincteric anal fistula: a retrospective analysis2020Retrospective review

LIFT

BioLIFT

1194YesYesYesYesNoNo
Total11,819 patients552 outcomes65.8%67.6%39.7%64.3%20.0%11.0%
AdegbolaShort-term efficacy and safety of three novel sphincter-sparing techniques for anal fistulae: a systematic review2017Systematic review
AlasariOverview of anal fistula and systematic review of ligation of the intersphincteric fistula tract (LIFT)2014Systematic review
CirocchiThe treatment of anal fistulas with biologically derived products: is innovation better than conventional surgical treatment? An update2013Systematic review
CirocchiMeta-analysis of fibrin glue versus surgery for treatment of fistula-in-ano2010Systematic review
GargThe efficacy of anal fistula plug in fistula-in-ano: a systematic review2010Systematic review
HongLigation of intersphincteric fistula tract (LIFT) to treat anal fistula: systematic review and meta-analysis2014Systematic review
JacobSurgical intervention for anorectal fistula2010Systematic review
MalikIncision and drainage of perianal abscess with or without treatment of anal fistula2010Systematic review
O’RiordanA systematic review of the anal fistula plug for patients with Crohn’s and non-Crohn’s related fistula-in-ano2012Systematic review
PuFistula plug versus conventional surgical treatment for anal fistulas: a systematic review and meta-analysis2012Systematic review
RattoFistulotomy or fistulectomy and primary sphincteroplasty for anal fistula (FIPS): a systematic review2015Systematic review
RitchieIncontinence rates after cutting seton treatment for anal fistula2009Systematic review
SiranyThe ligation of the intersphincteric fistula tract procedure for anal fistula: a mixed bag of results2015Systematic review
SoltaniEndorectal advancement flap for cryptoglandular or Crohn’s fistula-in-ano2010Systematic review
VialFaecal incontinence after seton treatment for anal fistulae with and without surgical division of internal anal sphincter: a systematic review2010Systematic review

RCT randomized controlled trial, ADM acellular dermal matrix, ERAF endorectal advancement flap, LIFT  ligation of intersphincteric fistula tract, EAS external anal sphincter, IAS internal anal sphincter, AFP anal fistula plug, FISR fistulectomy/fistulotomy and immediate sphincter reconstruction, EUA examination under anaesthetic, MAFT minimally invasive anal fistula treatment, ASC adipose-derived stem cells, PRP platelet-rich plasma, PRGF plasma-rich growth factor, PERFACT proximal superficial cauterization, emptying regularly fistula tracts and curettage of tracts, FiLaC fistula laser closure, VAAFT video-assisted anal fistula treatment, PRF platelet-rich fibrin, TFSIA tunnel-like fistulectomy plus draining seton combined with incision of internal opening of anal fistula

Overview of the included studies ADM ERAF Advancement flap and drainage seton around EAS Seton around IAS AFP ERAF Fibrin glue Seton Fistulotomy and 10% sucralfate Fistulotomy and placebo Fistulotomy Fistulotomy and marsupialization Seton Seton EUA Drainage of abscess Fistulotomy (and marsupialization) Seton Fibrin glue Advancement flap Transperineal core-out and repair Martius flap Sphincter repair Defunctioning stoma Proctectomy and permanent colostomy AFP Advancement flap Fistulectomy Fistulotomy and marsupialization AFP Fibrin glue Advancement flap Seton Seton Seton PRP Fibrin glue Advancement flap Advancement flap ASC and fibrin glue Fibrin glue LIFT BioLIFT Fistulotomy and 7% sucralfate Fistulotomy and placebo Fistulotomy LIFT procedure Seton Advancement flap AFP Collagen paste injection Fibrin glue LIFT procedure LIPT-plug procedure ASC ASC and fibrin glue Fibrin glue Fistulotomy Seton Fistulotomy AFP Fibrin glue Advancement flap Fistulectomy Fistulotomy and marsupialization AFP Surgeon’s preference (fistulotomy, seton, advancement flap or LIFT) Fistulectomy Fistulotomy Advancement flap Advancement flap Seton Seton Seton LIFT procedure Advancement flap Clip Fistulectomy LIFT procedure Advancement flap Fistulotomy Fistulectomy Seton Rerouting of fistula tract and seton around internal anal sphincter AFP ERAF Fistulotomy Fistulectomy and ERAF Fistulotomy FISR Seton Fistulectomy and advancement flap ERAF FISR Fistulotomy and phenytoin Fistulotomy Seton Fistulotomy and LIFT procedure AFP Advancement flap Fistulotomy Fistulectomy Seton Seton Fistulotomy LIFT procedure Advancement flap LIFT procedure Fibrin glue Advancement flap AFP Advancement flap and AFP Advancement flap and advancement flap LIFT procedure LIFT procedure and fistulectomy ERAF LIFT procedure AFP Advancement flap AFP Advancement flap Fistulotomy Advancement flap Fistulotomy Sphincter-preserving procedures Suture dragging and pad compression Fistulotomy Seton Fistulotomy AFP Advancement flap TFSIA Seton Shengji decoction Potassium permanganate LIFT BioLIFT RCT randomized controlled trial, ADM acellular dermal matrix, ERAF endorectal advancement flap, LIFT  ligation of intersphincteric fistula tract, EAS external anal sphincter, IAS internal anal sphincter, AFP anal fistula plug, FISR fistulectomy/fistulotomy and immediate sphincter reconstruction, EUA examination under anaesthetic, MAFT minimally invasive anal fistula treatment, ASC adipose-derived stem cells, PRP platelet-rich plasma, PRGF plasma-rich growth factor, PERFACT proximal superficial cauterization, emptying regularly fistula tracts and curettage of tracts, FiLaC fistula laser closure, VAAFT video-assisted anal fistula treatment, PRF platelet-rich fibrin, TFSIA tunnel-like fistulectomy plus draining seton combined with incision of internal opening of anal fistula

Data synthesis

Outcome categorisation

The resulting list of outcomes was reviewed by the study management group, including patient representatives (AM, NI, GK, RW, HG, MK, UG, PT, SB) to enable those with similar wording or meaning to be reduced to a single outcome. These were then mapped according to the COMET taxonomy developed for outcomes in medical research [13]. In this taxonomy, the measurable aspects of health conditions can be structured into five core areas, namely death, physiological or clinical, life impact, resource use, and adverse events, and further subdivided into 38 domains.

Data analysis

Primary, secondary, and overall outcome reporting were analysed. Results were summarized using frequencies and percentages. The frequency of outcome domain reporting was calculated. The interventions studied, number of outcome definitions and measurement instruments used were collated and analysed.

Results

Search strategy and study selection

The electronic databases Medline (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), and The Cochrane Library were searched in May 2018, followed by an updated search in May 2020, identifying a total of 2583 records. A schematic overview of the inclusion and exclusion of articles, including reasons provided for exclusion, is presented in Fig. 1. Full-text screening resulted in the inclusion of 143 articles, including 15 systematic reviews. The systematic reviews were individually screened for any additional studies that were not captured by the initial search and this yielded 27 articles, resulting in a final number of 155 articles from which data were extracted.
Fig. 1

Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses flow chart of study selection

Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses flow chart of study selection

Study characteristics

An overview of the 155 included studies is presented in Table 2. Interventions for cryptoglandular AF were assessed on a total of 11,819 patients (mean 76, range 10–462 participants per study). The majority of studies were prospective studies (52%) and assessed the effectiveness of sphincter-preserving procedures, of which fistula plugs (19%) and ligation of intersphincteric fistula tract (LIFT) procedures (19%) were assessed most frequently. The characteristics of the included studies are presented in Table 3. The quality of outcome reporting for each individual study was assessed using Harman’s criteria [12] and reported in Table 2. The criteria involve assessing whether: (1) The primary outcome for a study is clearly stated, (2) The primary outcome is clearly defined so that other researchers can reproduce its measurement, (3) The secondary outcomes are clearly stated, (4) The secondary outcomes are clearly defined, (5) The authors explain the use of the outcomes they have selected and (6) Any methods were used to enhance the quality of outcome measurement. The average number of criteria met across all studies was two, with only 38 of 155 studies (25%) meeting ≥ four criteria, indicating high-quality outcome reporting in just a quarter of the studies assessed.
Table 3

Study characteristics

n (%)
Total included155 (100)
Study types contributing to data synthesis
 Retrospective studies66 (43)

 Prospective studies

(RCT)

89 (57)

30 (19)

Publication year
 2008–201040 (25)
 2011–201350 (32)
 2014–201635 (23)
 2017–201927 (17)
 20203 (2)

AFP anal fistula plug, ERAF endorectal advancement flap, LIFT ligation of intersphincteric fistula tract, VAAFT video-assisted anal fistula treatment, ASC adipose-derived stem cells, TFSIA tunnel-like fistulectomy plus draining seton combined with incision of internal opening of anal fistula, FISR fistulectomy/fistulotomy and immediate sphincter reconstruction, FiLaC fistula laser closure, ADM acellular dermal matrix, PRGF plasma-rich growth factor, PERFACT proximal superficial cauterization, emptying regularly fistula tracts and curettage of tracts, PRF platelet-rich fibrin, MAFT minimally invasive anal fistula treatment, PRP platelet-rich plasma

Study characteristics Prospective studies (RCT) 89 (57) 30 (19) No control Advancement flap ERAF Fistulotomy or cutting seton or advancement flap or LIFT LIFT LIFT-plug BioLIFT Modified LIFT LIFT and seton LIFT and advancement flap LIFT and fistulectomy No control LIFT-plug Advancement flap LIFT and fistulectomy BioLIFT No control Seton(s) Fistulotomy Fistulotomy and LIFT Rerouting of fistula tract and seton around internal anal sphincter Fistulotomy Fistulotomy and sucralfate Partial fistulotomy and seton Fistulotomy and phenytoin No control Advancement flap Fistulectomy Fistulotomy and placebo sucralfate Fistulectomy and ERAF Fistulectomy and seton Fistulotomy and marsupialization Fistulotomy Advancement flap Advancement flap and platelet-rich plasma Advancement flap and drainage of abscess Advancement flap and drainage seton around external anal sphincter No control Advancement flap Seton around internal anal sphincter Fibrin glue Fibrin glue and advancement flap No control Seton Fibrin glue and ASC Fistulectomy Fistulectomy and electro-cauterization Fistulectomy and closure of internal fistula opening TFSIA No control Fistulotomy Fistulotomy and marsupialization Seton No control Fistulectomy AFP LIFT FISR ASC ASC and fibrin glue No control ASC, fibrin glue, and fibrin glue Fibrin glue No control ERAF Modified Hanley Modified Hanley, drainage, and setons No control Fibrin glue AFP anal fistula plug, ERAF endorectal advancement flap, LIFT ligation of intersphincteric fistula tract, VAAFT video-assisted anal fistula treatment, ASC adipose-derived stem cells, TFSIA tunnel-like fistulectomy plus draining seton combined with incision of internal opening of anal fistula, FISR fistulectomy/fistulotomy and immediate sphincter reconstruction, FiLaC fistula laser closure, ADM acellular dermal matrix, PRGF plasma-rich growth factor, PERFACT proximal superficial cauterization, emptying regularly fistula tracts and curettage of tracts, PRF platelet-rich fibrin, MAFT minimally invasive anal fistula treatment, PRP platelet-rich plasma

Study outcomes

In total, 552 patient- and clinician-reported outcomes were extracted from 155 studies, with studies reporting a median of three outcomes (interquartile range 2–5) per study. Duplicate and analogous terms were merged to form 52 outcomes, of which healing (77%), incontinence (63%), recurrence (40%), and pain (26%) were reported most frequently (Table 4). Outcomes such as healing and recurrence were sometimes measured at different time points within the same study but referred to as primary or secondary outcomes. This resulted in some studies reporting outcomes of healing and recurrence more than once.
Table 4

Frequency of outcome reporting

OutcomeReported as primary outcome (n)Reported as secondary outcome (n)Unstated (n)Number of studies reporting outcome (n) (%)
Healing801238120 (77)
Incontinence24353998 (63)
Recurrence16212762 (40)
Pain12161240 (26)
Complications15101136 (23)
Closure time133925 (16)
Treatment failure441422 (14)
Quality of life612422 (14)
Duration of treatment47112 (8)
Morbidity13711 (7)
Return to work2237 (5)
Patient satisfaction2237 (5)
Anorectal manometry0066 (4)
Pus discharge2305 (3)
Hospital stay1225 (3)
Adverse effects2305 (3)
Fistula persistence3104 (3)
Reinterventions0134 (3)
Safety1304 (3)
Plug dislodgement rates1203 (2)
Symptoms3003 (2)
Unit cutting time2002 (1)
Size of operative wound0202 (1)
Postoperative perineal sepsis1012 (1)
Postoperative bleeding0022 (1)
Cost-effectiveness1102 (1)
Difficulty of technique2002 (1)
Impact on daily life0202 (1)
Endoanal ultrasound0022 (1)
Radiological healing0101 (1)
Anorectal deformity rate0101 (1)
Burning sensation0101 (1)
Itching0101 (1)
Length of time until seton removal0101 (1)
Fraction of patients showing ≥ 50% decrease in fistula size0101 (1)
Investigator’s satisfaction score0101 (1)
Amount of mucosal covering0101 (1)
Asymptomatic1001 (1)
Subjective parameters0101 (1)
Glue reaction0011 (1)
Median mucosal blood flow0011 (1)
Problems related to sexual function0011 (1)
Pudendal nerve terminal motor latency0011 (1)
Duration for return to normal activity1001 (1)
Duration of immobilisation1001 (1)
Emerging of a secondary abscess1001 (1)
Need for a new wave of drainage1001 (1)
Removal or migration of the clip1001 (1)
Perianal incision wound healing1001 (1)
Analgesic requirement0011 (1)
Keyhole like anomaly0011 (1)
Conversion into intersphincteric perianal fistula0101 (1)
Frequency of outcome reporting

Outcome categorisation

The outcomes were categorized into core areas and domains according to the COMET taxonomy, with guidance from a member of COMET. The frequency of these outcomes and their categorisation is shown in Table 5. Adverse event outcomes are categorised under their appropriate taxonomy and identified as a harm outcome [13]. Cryptoglandular AF treatment rarely impacts lifespan, therefore the core area death was excluded from categorisation. Some outcomes were categorised in multiple domains, as the study management group considered their impact to be broad. For instance, ‘problems related to sexual function’ was included in the domains physical, social and emotional functioning and well-being. Outcomes belonging to the core area of ‘physiological or clinical’ were placed in domains according to their underlying cause or affected body system [13]. Whilst categorisation highlighted the spread of outcomes across all relevant domains, the majority focused on the physiological or clinical impact, particularly in the domain of gastrointestinal outcomes (99%), whereas only 12% of outcomes were related to the impact on physical, role and social functioning and emotional functioning and wellbeing (Table 5).
Table 5

Outcome categorisation and frequency of outcome reporting according to the COMET taxonomy

Core areaDomainOutcomesNo. studies reporting outcomes (%)
Physiological or clinicalGastrointestinal outcomesHealing154 (99)
Incontinence (harm)
Recurrence (harm)
Pain
Treatment failure (harm)
Closure time
Pus discharge
Anorectal manometry
Fistula persistence (harm)
Plug dislodgement rates (harm)
Unit cutting time
Symptoms
Radiological healing
Anorectal deformity rate (harm)
Burning sensation
Itching
Fraction of patients showing ≥ 50% decrease in fistula size
Amount of mucosal covering
Asymptomatic
Subjective parameters
Glue reaction (harm)
Endoanal ultrasound
Pudendal nerve terminal motor latency
Removal or migration of the clip (harm)
Perianal incision wound healing
Conversion into intersphincteric fistula (harm)
Keyhole like anomaly (harm)
General outcomesMorbidity (harm)11 (7)
Infection and infestation outcomesPostoperative perineal sepsis (harm)3 (2)
Emerging of a secondary abscess (harm)
Vascular outcomesMedian mucosal blood flow2 (1)
Postoperative bleeding (harm)
Life impactPhysical functioningProblems related to sexual functioning5 (3)
Duration for return to normal activity
Duration of immobilisation
Impact daily life
Social functioningProblems related to sexual functioning3 (2)
Impact daily life
Role functioningReturn to work8 (5)
Impact daily life
Emotional functioning or well-beingProblems related to sexual functioning3 (2)
Impact daily life
Global quality of lifeQuality of life22 (14)
Delivery of careTreatment failure32 (22)
Duration of treatment
Patient satisfaction
Size of operative wound
Length of time until seton removal
Investigator’s satisfaction score
Difficulty of technique
Resource useEconomicCost-effectiveness2 (1)
HospitalHospital stay5 (3)
Need for further interventionReinterventions6 (4)
Need for a new wave of drainage
Analgesic requirement
Adverse eventsAdverse events and/or effectsComplications44 (28)
Adverse effects
Safety
Outcome categorisation and frequency of outcome reporting according to the COMET taxonomy

Outcome definitions

Significant heterogeneity in outcome definition and overlap between definitions was noted in the outcomes of ‘healing’, ‘recurrence’, and ‘treatment failure’.

Healing

Healing was reported in 120 studies (77%) and was synonymous with terms such as ‘healing rate’, ‘fistula closure’, ‘success’, ‘cure’, ‘effectiveness’, and ‘complete clinical response’. There was considerable heterogeneity in the definitions of healing, however, overlap between the components of each definition meant that all could be defined by using one or more of the components presented in Table 6. Considering the ways in which components could be combined, 34 different definitions were found. Healing was most frequently defined as ‘healing of the external fistula opening and absence of symptoms’ (n = 16). In nine studies, a radiological assessment was needed to confirm or refute healing [14-22], whereas another study identified ‘radiological healing’ as a separate outcome [23]. Five of these 10 studies included the radiological description required to demonstrate healing [14, 15, 18, 21, 22]. In 21 studies, the definition of healing was dependent upon a time period after which the fistula should be assessed, or for the duration of which the components of healing should be present, which in themselves demonstrated significant variation, ranging from 2 weeks [24] to 12 months [16, 25] after the procedure.
Table 6

Components used, in varying combinations, to define the outcome ‘healing’

ComponentTimes used
Absence of symptoms70
Closure of the external fistula opening61
Absence of abscess or infection or inflammation or sepsis27
Closure of the (surgical) wound24
Closure of the internal fistula opening15
Closure of the fistula tract14
No additional intervention required8
Absence of recurrence or persistence or treatment failure8
Absence of anal sphincter injury1
Components used, in varying combinations, to define the outcome ‘healing’

Recurrence, treatment failure and persistence

The terms recurrence, treatment failure, and persistence were used interchangeably to describe a spectrum of clinical manifestations, ranging from no evidence of closure or persistence of fistula and symptoms [26-29], to temporary closure followed by re-appearance of the original fistula [26], to the development of additional fistulas [20, 30–32]. Similar to healing, the definitions were broken down into components which are presented in Table 7. The most frequently used definitions were ‘persistence or recurrence of symptoms’ (n = 21), followed by ‘persistence or reappearance of the external fistula opening’ (n = 13). There were 19 different definitions of recurrence and treatment failure. In 10 studies, the definition was qualified by a time period at or after which the fistula had to be assessed, ranging from within the first month [20] to 12 months after treatment [33].
Table 7

Components used, in varying combinations, to define the outcomes ‘recurrence’ and ‘treatment failure’

ComponentTimes used
Persistence or recurrence of symptoms21
Reappearance of the fistula after healing16
Persistence or reappearance of the external fistula opening13
Absence of wound healing8
Abscess or infection6
Absence of fistula closure or persistence6
Non-healing fistula3
Additional intervention required3
Additional fistula2
Components used, in varying combinations, to define the outcomes ‘recurrence’ and ‘treatment failure’

Outcome measurement instruments

Heterogeneity was noted amongst the measurement instruments used for the most frequently reported outcomes (Table 8). Combinations of measurement instruments were frequently used. Furthermore, the instruments for each outcome were not always clearly stated and many studies used unspecified questionnaires.
Table 8

Measurement instruments used, in varying combinations, to assess the most frequently reported outcomes

OutcomeInstruments (used in various combinations)Times used
HealingClinical examination, including digital rectal examination88
(Telephone) interview16
MRI9
(3D) endoanal ultrasound7
Medical record review7
Anoscopy or proctoscopy or rectoscopy7
(Un)specified questionnaire6
Digital photograph of the external fistula opening2
Transanal ultrasound1
Examination under anaesthetic1
Anal endosonography1
Incontinence/sphincter functionWexner Cleveland Clinic Florida incontinence score48
Patient-reported9
Vaizey incontinence score9
Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life Scale6
(Un)specified questionnaire5
Anorectal manometry5
Endoanal ultrasound4
Specified grading system3
Clinical examination, including digital rectal examination3
Colorectal functional outcome questionnaire3
(Telephone) interview3
Medical record review2
German Society of Coloproctology score1
Williams grade1
Fecal Incontinence Severity Index1

Recurrence

Treatment failure

Clinical examination43
(Telephone) interview7
MRI6
Medical record review6
(Un)specified questionnaire3
Endorectal ultrasound2
Anoscopy or proctoscopy2
3D endoanal ultrasound1
Anal endosonography1
Patient-reported1
Quality of lifeFecal Incontinence Quality of Life Scale6
Short Form-36 health survey (SF-36)6
EQ-5D4
Short Form-12 health survey (SF-12)2
Cleveland global quality of life2
Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index2
(Un)specified questionnaire2
Quality of Life Scale1
Visual Analogue Scale (VAS)1
Fecal Incontinence Severity Index1
PainVAS31
Patient-reported2
Specified grading system1
Medical record review1
Number of analgesics used1

MRI magnetic resinance imaging, VAS Visual Analogue Scale, EQ-5D EuroQol five-dimensions questionnaire

Measurement instruments used, in varying combinations, to assess the most frequently reported outcomes Recurrence Treatment failure MRI magnetic resinance imaging, VAS Visual Analogue Scale, EQ-5D EuroQol five-dimensions questionnaire

Discussion

This systematic review is the first study to provide an overview of the outcomes reported in interventional studies for AF. We identified 552 outcomes from 155 studies published in the last 12 years, which were merged into 52 unique outcomes, of which healing was reported most frequently (77%). Our results demonstrate heterogeneity in outcome definition and measurement, making the use of such studies to supplement current understanding of fistula management and guide treatment pathways much more challenging. The lack of consistency and clarity in definitions of success, treatment failure, and recurrence after fistula treatment has been previously noted [34]. Despite being one of the most frequently reported outcomes, healing was variably defined in terms of anatomical features, absence of a specific set of symptoms or healing of the (surgical) wound. This highlights the difficulty of data synthesis across different studies, particularly when a fistula has healed in one study simply by closure of the external fistula opening [35], but would be considered persistent in another, where both the external and internal fistula openings, and an absence of symptoms are required [36]. The addition of radiological healing provides additional complexity, as it is well documented that deep tissue healing of perianal fistula as assessed on magnetic resonance imaging lags behind clinical healing by a period of months [37-39]. Nevertheless, radiological outcomes and objective measures of the disease have been frequently used in studies of AF, and their potential inclusion in a COS warrants further discussion and involvement of radiological expertise. The various definitions of recurrence, persistence, and treatment failure demonstrated overlap, however, in line with previous suggestions [34], we determined that treatment failure and persistence of the fistula, i.e. no change in the morphology and symptomatology of the original fistula, should be differentiated from fistula recurrence, which describes reappearance of the fistula after a period of resolution, and that development of new fistulas should be considered separately. However, persistence and recurrence of fistulas could simply be the same problem viewed at different time points, and from a patient’s perspective 1 year after the intervention, the difference is probably minimal. This would be an interesting area to explore during the generation of the COS. The quality of studies eligible for data extraction was assessed using Harman’s criteria [12], however, only a quarter of the studies demonstrated high-quality outcome reporting using this method. Whilst the majority of studies clearly stated their measured outcomes, few went as far as defining whether the outcomes were primary or secondary. Only 20% of the studies explained their reasoning for selecting their outcomes. This may be due to the fact that healing, incontinence, and recurrence, the most commonly reported outcomes, require little explanation for their selection to fistula surgeons or patients, as the ultimate aim of any fistula treatment is frequently cited as healing with minimal impact on continence, and minimal risk of recurrence. The outcomes summarised in this systematic review were categorised according to the COMET taxonomy. Although all relevant domains are represented, the vast majority of outcomes are related to the pathophysiology of disease and treatment. Only 10% of the outcomes reported by all studies in the last 12 years were related to the impact of disease in terms of its influence on patients’ physical, social and role functioning, in other words their quality of life. Whilst the inclusion of outcomes such as these is encouraging and should be recognised, their use is infrequent and gives a narrow reflection of the wide-ranging impact that fistula symptoms or treatments have for patients. For example, whilst the impact on sexual functioning has been recognised, the wider effects on personal and social relationships have not been recorded, as well as the influence of symptoms on non-work-related activities. Whilst the pathophysiological aspects of the disease are inevitably interrelated with life impact and use of resources, focusing only on the physical symptoms fails to address adequately the wider impact of living with AF. Earlier studies have identified that patients and surgeons allocate importance to different aspects of quality of life associated with anal fistula and its treatment. Surgeons rated continence, leakage, pain, cure and sepsis, whereas patients identified independent activity, good health, pain, continence, psychological health and leakage as their most important aspects of quality of life [40]. We are currently conducting further qualitative work to explore patients’ experiences of disease further, and patient involvement in deciding the final COS and how these outcomes should be prioritised is crucial to ensure that the COS remains representative of all stakeholders [7] and centred around relevance to patients. The current study reported the range of outcome measurement instruments used for the most frequently reported outcomes. Validated measures were largely used for outcomes such as incontinence and quality of life, allowing the benefit of comparison across studies, as well as with other chronic health conditions [41]. However, the broad range of validated measures across studies for AF makes it difficult to compare these specific outcomes across interventions. This supports the need for a systematic method of selecting appropriate Outcome Measurement Instruments (OMIs) once the final COS is established [7, 42]. Furthermore, most measurement instruments of quality of life were generic. Disease-specific measures are known to be more sensitive to change and can directly detect the specific concerns of particular clinical groups, which may be underrepresented in generic measurement instruments [43]. Planned qualitative work will help to determine whether the concerns of patients with AF are adequately addressed by these instruments, or whether the development of a disease-specific Patient-Reported Outcome Measure (PROM) is needed. The strength of this systematic review is that with the range of studies reviewed, it is well placed to inform a long list of items for the development of a COS. However, it is limited by the lack of outcomes related to the quality of life, suggesting that the additional qualitative feedback from patients required by COMET to supplement this longlist is crucial. Although it is possible that not all relevant studies have been captured due to the eligibility criteria used, the sheer number of outcomes extracted from the included studies make it likely that saturation has been reached and that any additional outcomes would be procedure specific, and, therefore, not eligible for a generic COS representing a minimum set of outcomes to be adopted by all studies, regardless of intervention used. A further limitation is the English language inclusion criterion, although no abstracts or full texts were excluded based on the language criterion alone, rather they studied the wrong population or were review articles or commentaries. The lack of non-English papers may limit the generalisability of these findings across cultural and ethnic groups. This may be effectively countered through the subsequent longlisting and consensus processes, which will include a broad ethnic and cultural diversity.

Conclusions

This systematic review highlights the need for consensus amongst researchers and clinicians regarding the outcomes that are essential in determining successful fistula treatment, and how they should be defined and measured. The underrepresentation of outcomes relating to the quality of life needs to be challenged, and qualitative exploration of the patient experience, as well as active engagement of patients in determining a COS are crucial.
  43 in total

Review 1.  Generic and disease-specific measures in assessing health status and quality of life.

Authors:  D L Patrick; R A Deyo
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1989-03       Impact factor: 2.983

2.  Bioabsorbable synthetic plug in the treatment of anal fistulas.

Authors:  Afshin Heydari; Grazia Maria Attinà; Enrico Merolla; Micaela Piccoli; Reza Fazlalizadeh; Gianluigi Melotti
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 4.585

3.  Quality of life with anal fistula.

Authors:  H A Owen; G N Buchanan; A Schizas; R Cohen; A B Williams
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2016-05       Impact factor: 1.891

4.  Advancement Flap for Treatment of Complex Cryptoglandular Anal Fistula: Prediction of Therapy Success or Failure Using Anamnestic and Clinical Parameters.

Authors:  Lars Boenicke; Eduard Karsten; Hubert Zirngibl; Peter Ambe
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2017-09       Impact factor: 3.352

5.  Topical sucralfate treatment of anal fistulotomy wounds: a randomized placebo-controlled trial.

Authors:  Pravin J Gupta; Purushottam S Heda; Subhash A Shrirao; Surekha S Kalaskar
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 4.585

6.  The use of the loose seton technique as a definitive treatment for recurrent and persistent high trans-sphincteric anal fistulas: a long-term outcome.

Authors:  Arieh Eitan; Marina Koliada; Amitai Bickel
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2009-02-24       Impact factor: 3.452

7.  Early Results of a Phase I Trial Using an Adipose-Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cell-Coated Fistula Plug for the Treatment of Transsphincteric Cryptoglandular Fistulas.

Authors:  Eric J Dozois; Amy L Lightner; Kellie L Mathis; Heidi K Chua; Scott R Kelley; Joel G Fletcher; Allan B Dietz; Jessica J Friton; Greg W Butler; William A Faubion
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2019-05       Impact factor: 4.585

8.  A taxonomy has been developed for outcomes in medical research to help improve knowledge discovery.

Authors:  Susanna Dodd; Mike Clarke; Lorne Becker; Chris Mavergames; Rebecca Fish; Paula R Williamson
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2017-12-28       Impact factor: 6.437

9.  Contemporary surgical practice in the management of anal fistula: results from an international survey.

Authors:  C Ratto; U Grossi; F Litta; G L Di Tanna; A Parello; V De Simone; P Tozer; D DE Zimmerman; Y Maeda
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2019-07-31       Impact factor: 3.781

10.  How to select outcome measurement instruments for outcomes included in a "Core Outcome Set" - a practical guideline.

Authors:  Cecilia A C Prinsen; Sunita Vohra; Michael R Rose; Maarten Boers; Peter Tugwell; Mike Clarke; Paula R Williamson; Caroline B Terwee
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2016-09-13       Impact factor: 2.279

View more
  3 in total

1.  Living with cryptoglandular anal fistula: a qualitative investigation of the patient's experience through semi-structured patient interviews.

Authors:  Nusrat Iqbal; Astrid J H M Machielsen; Stephanie O Breukink; Rebecca Woodcock; Gillian Kane; Laith Alrubaiy; Ugo Grossi; Merel L Kimman; Phil J Tozer
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2022-02-17       Impact factor: 3.440

Review 2.  Emerging Data on Fistula Laser Closure (FiLaC) for the Treatment of Perianal Fistulas; Patient Selection and Outcomes.

Authors:  Samuel O Adegbola; Kapil Sahnan; Phillip Tozer; Janindra Warusavitarne
Journal:  Clin Exp Gastroenterol       Date:  2021-12-06

Review 3.  Do Patient-Reported Quality-of-Life (QoL) Scales Provide an Adequate Assessment of Patients with Cryptoglandular Anal Fistulae? A Systematic Review of Measurement Instruments and Their Content Validity.

Authors:  Nusrat Iqbal; Rishi Shah; Laith Alrubaiy; Phil Tozer
Journal:  Clin Pract       Date:  2022-08-15
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.