Efficacy of different surgical treatments for management of anal fistula: a network meta-analysis

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

• Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
• Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
• Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
• Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
• Emerging · Emerging topic under active research

Abstract (original English)

Purpose Currently, the anal fistula treatment which optimises healing and preserves bowel continence remains unclear. The aim of our study was to compare the relative efficacy of different surgical treatments for AF through a network meta-analysis. Methods Systematic searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL databases up to October 2022 identified randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing surgical treatments for anal fistulae. Fistulae were classified as simple (inter-sphincteric or low trans-sphincteric fistulae crossing less than 30% of the external anal sphincter (EAS)) and complex (high trans-sphincteric fistulae involving more than 30% of the EAS). Treatments evaluated in only one trial were excluded from the primary analyses to minimise bias. The primary outcomes were rates of success in achieving AF healing and bowel incontinence. Results Fifty-two RCTs were included. Of the 14 treatments considered, there were no significant differences regarding short-term (6 months or less postoperatively) and long-term (more than 6 months postoperatively) success rates between any of the treatments in patients with both simple and complex anal fistula. Ligation of the inter-sphincteric fistula tract (LIFT) ranked best for minimising bowel incontinence in simple (99.1% of comparisons; 3 trials, n = 70 patients) and complex anal fistula (86.2% of comparisons; 3 trials, n = 102 patien

Evidence level

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.