Why do we have to review our experience in managing cases with idiopathic fistula-in-ano regularly?

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

• 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)

"Why do we have to review our experience in managing idiopathic fistula-in-ano regularly?" In order to answer this apparently simple question, we reviewed our clinical and surgical cases and most important relevant literature to find a rational and scientific answer. It would appear that whatever method you adopt in fistula management, there is a price to pay regarding either rate of recurrence (higher with conservative methods) or impairment of continence (higher with traditional surgery). Since, at the moment, reliable data to identify a treatment as a gold standard in the management of anal fistulas are lacking, the correct approach to this condition must consider all the anatomic and clinicopathological aspects of the disease; this knowledge joined to an eclectic attitude of the surgeon, who should be familiar with different types of treatment, is the only guarantee for a satisfactory treatment. As a conclusion, it is worthwhile to remember that adequate initial treatment significantly reduces recurrence, which, when it occurs, is usually due to failure to recognise the tract and primary opening at the initial operation.

Evidence level

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

Browse all related research

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