Dataset Information

Long-term follow-up study of loose combined cutting seton surgery for patients with high anal fistula.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The treatment of high anal fistula (HAF) is still difficult for clinical surgeons. Our previous study demonstrated the short-term benefit of loose combined cutting seton (LCCS) for patients with HAF. This study aimed to evaluate the long-term effectiveness of LCCS for treating HAF patients.

Methods

We retrospectively enrolled consecutive HAF patients who received LCCS therapy in our hospital between March 2014 and July 2017. After enrollment, all patients were followed up by clinical review. The patients' clinical information and most recent follow-up results were collected. Pain was assessed by the visual analog scale (VAS), and the severity of fecal incontinence was assessed by the Wexner Continence Grading Scale. We also assessed the patients' quality of life (QOL) using a the MOS item short from health survey (SF-36) questionnaire. HAF healing was considered the primary outcome, while the fistula recurrence rate, severity of fecal incontinence, and QOL were the secondary outcomes.

Results

In total, 22 patients (18 male, four female) were enrolled in the final analysis. The mean duration of follow-up was 3.65 years (interquartile range: 3.55-4.22; range, 3.50-5.43). All patients were cured and there was no recurrence during the follow-up period. Eight patients reported a Wexner score of 1, while the remaining patients reported a score of 0 at the final follow-up. Furthermore, one patient had a VAS score of 1, while the remaining patients had a VAS score of 0, which indicated almost no postoperative pain. The QOL of all patients improved significantly.

Conclusions

LCCS is an effective method to treat HAF patients. Large, multicenter randomized controlled trials are warranted.

SUBMITTER: Zhi C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8350621 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Long-term follow-up study of loose combined cutting seton surgery for patients with high anal fistula.

Zhi Congcong C Huang Zichen Z Liu Dun D Zheng Lihua L

Annals of translational medicine 20210701 14

<h4>Background</h4>The treatment of high anal fistula (HAF) is still difficult for clinical surgeons. Our previous study demonstrated the short-term benefit of loose combined cutting seton (LCCS) for patients with HAF. This study aimed to evaluate the long-term effectiveness of LCCS for treating HAF patients.<h4>Methods</h4>We retrospectively enrolled consecutive HAF patients who received LCCS therapy in our hospital between March 2014 and July 2017. After enrollment, all patients were followed ...[more]

PMID: 34430601

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundHigh perianal abscess is an emergency in the anorectal department. It can result in long-term pain and a huge psychological burden to patients, and seriously affects the quality of life of patients. At present, the effect of antibiotics alone for high perianal abscess is not satisfactory. Loose combined cutting seton (LCCS) can effectively treat high anal fistulas and high perianal abscesses in our clinical practice, but there is no sufficient evidence for its effectiveness in the treatment of high perianal abscesses. The purpose of this study is to observe the effectiveness and safety of LCCS in the treatment of high perianal abscess.MethodsThis study is a single-center, prospective, single-blind, randomized, controlled, non-inferiority clinical study. This study will include patients who are diagnosed with high perianal abscesses and hospitalized for surgery in the Department of Proctology in China-Japan Friendship Hospital (enrollment time: from January 2022 through December 2024). Patients in the experimental group will be treated with LCCS, while patients in the control group will be treated with incision and drainage. Follow-ups will be performed at 1, 3, 7, 14, 21, 28, 90, and 180 days after the operation. The main outcome measures are as follows: (I) cure rate; (II) half-year recurrence rate; (III) postoperative pain visual analog scale (VAS) score; (IV) wound healing time; (V) postoperative anal function evaluation by the Wexner scale; (VI) pressure measurement of the anal canal and rectum before and at half a year after surgery; and (VII) the incidence of adverse events.DiscussionThis study will assess the effectiveness and safety of LCCS in the treatment of high perianal abscess through a strictly designed randomized controlled study, and provides evidence for treatment in clinical practice, thereby improving the treatment effect and improving patients' quality of life.Trial registrationChinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR2100049198.

Project description:ImportanceBariatric surgery is an accepted treatment for obesity. Despite extensive literature, few studies report long-term follow-up in cohorts with adequate retention rates.ObjectiveTo assess the quality of evidence and treatment effectiveness 2 years after bariatric procedures for weight loss, type 2 diabetes, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia in severely obese adults.Evidence reviewMEDLINE and Cochrane databases were searched from 1946 through May 15, 2014. Search terms included bariatric surgery, individual bariatric procedures, and obesity. Studies were included if they described outcomes for gastric bypass, gastric band, or sleeve gastrectomy performed on patients with a body mass index of 35 or greater, had more than 2 years of outcome information, and had follow-up measures for at least 80% of the initial cohort. Two investigators reviewed each study and a third resolved study inclusion disagreements.FindingsOf 7371 clinical studies reviewed, 29 studies (0.4%, 7971 patients) met inclusion criteria. All gastric bypass studies (6 prospective cohorts, 5 retrospective cohorts) and sleeve gastrectomy studies (2 retrospective cohorts) had 95% confidence intervals for the reported mean, median, or both exceeding 50% excess weight loss. This amount of excess weight loss occurred in 31% of gastric band studies (9 prospective cohorts, 5 retrospective cohorts). The mean sample-size-weighted percentage of excess weight loss for gastric bypass was 65.7% (n = 3544) vs 45.0% (n = 4109) for gastric band. Nine studies measured comorbidity improvement. For type 2 diabetes (glycated hemoglobin <6.5% without medication), sample-size-weighted remission rates were 66.7% for gastric bypass (n = 428) and 28.6% for gastric band (n = 96). For hypertension (blood pressure <140/90 mm Hg without medication), remission rates were 38.2% for gastric bypass ( n = 808) and 17.4% for gastric band (n = 247). For hyperlipidemia (cholesterol <200 mg/dL, high-density lipoprotein >40 mg/dL, low-density lipoprotein <160 mg/dL, and triglycerides <200 mg/dL), remission rates were 60.4% for gastric bypass (n = 477) and 22.7% for gastric band (n = 97).Conclusions and relevanceVery few bariatric surgery studies report long-term results with sufficient patient follow-up to minimize biased results. Gastric bypass has better outcomes than gastric band procedures for long-term weight loss, type 2 diabetes control and remission, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia. Insufficient evidence exists regarding long-term outcomes for gastric sleeve resections.

Dataset Information

Long-term follow-up study of loose combined cutting seton surgery for patients with high anal fistula.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Long-term follow-up study of loose combined cutting seton surgery for patients with high anal fistula.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets