Long-term Outcome of a Fissurectomy: A Prospective Single-Arm Study of 50 Operations out of 349 Initial Patients

Jean-David Zeitoun; Pierre Blanchard; Nadia Fathallah; Paul Benfredj; Nicolas Lemarchand; Vincent de Parades

doi:10.3393/ac.2017.06.12

Articles

Page Path: HOME > Ann Coloproctol > Volume 34(2); 2018 > Article

Original Article Long-term Outcome of a Fissurectomy: A Prospective Single-Arm Study of 50 Operations out of 349 Initial Patients: Jean-David Zeitoun^1,2, Pierre Blanchard³, Nadia Fathallah⁴, Paul Benfredj⁴, Nicolas Lemarchand⁴, Vincent de Parades⁴; Annals of Coloproctology 2018;34(2):83-87.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3393/ac.2017.06.12
Published online: April 30, 2018

¹Proctologie Médico-Interventionnelle, Groupe Hospitalier Diaconesses – Croix-Saint-Simon, Paris, France

²Gastroentérologie et Nutrition, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Paris, France

³Service de Biostatistiques et d’Epidémiologie, Institut Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France

⁴Proctologie Médico-Chirurgicale, Institut Léopold Bellan, Groupe Hospitalier Paris Saint-Joseph, Paris, France

Correspondence to: Jean-David Zeitoun, M.D. Groupe Hospitalier Diaconesses Croix Saint-Simon, 125, rue d’Avron, 75020, Paris, France Tel: +33 6 08 31 71 62, Fax: +331 44 64 33 17 E-mail: jdzeitoun@yahoo.fr

• Received: February 12, 2017 • Accepted: June 12, 2017

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

prev next

14,414 Views
186 Download
20 Web of Science
20 Crossref
23 Scopus

Full Article

Download PDF

Abstract
INTRODUCTION
METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
ARTICLE INFORMATION
REFERENCES

Abstract

Purpose
The surgical standard of care for patients with chronic anal fissure is still disputed. We aimed to assess the natural course of idiopathic anal fissure and the long-term outcome of a fissurectomy as a surgical treatment.
Methods
All consecutive patients referred to a single expert practitioner in a tertiary centre were primarily included. A fissurectomy was proposed in cases of refractory symptoms after 4 to 6 weeks of standard medical management. Only patients with idiopathic and noninfected anal fissures were included in this second subsample to undergo surgery. Conventional postoperative management was prescribed for all patients who had undergone surgery. The main outcome measures were the success rate (defined as a combination of wound healing and relief of pain) and postoperative anal continence.
Results
Three hundred forty-nine patients were primarily recruited. Fifty patients finally underwent surgery for an idiopathic and noninfected fissure. Among them, 47 (94%) were cured at the end of primary follow-up, and 44 of the 47 (93.6%) could be confirmed as being sustainably cured in the longer-term follow-up. The mean time of complete healing was 10.3 weeks (range, 5.7–36.4 weeks). All patients were free of pain at weeks 42. The continence score after surgery was not statistically different from the preoperative score.
Conclusion
A fissurectomy for the treatment of patients with an idiopathic noninfected fissure is associated with rapid pain relief and a high success rate even though complete healing may often be delayed. Moreover, it appears to have no adverse effect on continence.
Keywords: Anal fissure; Fissurectomy; Anal continence

INTRODUCTION

Anal fissure is one of the most frequent anal conditions. Sphincter hypertonia engendering local ischemia is considered as the main causal mechanism. Medical management is to be offered as a primary approach, with treatment of constipation being a mainstay of conservative therapy. However, when symptoms persist after 4 to 8 weeks of appropriate medical treatment, surgery should be considered. The lateral internal sphincterotomy remains the technique of choice for many practitioners, which is supported by good empirical evidence and by recommendations of scientific societies [1, 2]. It reduces the hypertonia by decreasing the pressure in the anal canal, thereby improving local vascularization and allowing the fissure to resolve. The results display an average 90% rate of healing and a recurrence rate below 10% [2, 3]. Nevertheless, the procedure is associated with anal incontinence rates up to 30% in some studies [4]. Therefore, alternative techniques have been proposed, but are considered as being associated with a lower level of evidence. Among those techniques are the ’tailored’ lateral sphincterotomy [5], pneumatic balloon dilation [6], and foremost surgical techniques that do not divide the internal anal sphincter, namely, a subcutaneous fissurotomy [7], fissurectomy [8, 9] and fissurectomy associated with anoplasty, the so-called V-Y cutaneous flap [10] or mucosal flap [9, 11]. Many authors initially offered those techniques to patients with high risk of postoperative incontinence, such as elderly people, multiparous women, patients with normal anal tone, patients with chronic diarrhea of any origin, and patients who had undergone previous anorectal surgery. Because the results exhibited similar rates of healing as compared to those obtained with a lateral internal sphincterotomy, both in anecdotal and published evidence, many proctologists, especially those in France, adopted those sphincter-sparing techniques as a standard care for any chronic anal fissure refractory to medical management. This is the case in our tertiary center where the fissurectomy is the most proposed technique for a chronic anal fissure. In this report, we aim to describe the natural history of anal fissure in a cohort of patients referred to our center and foremost to assess the long-term results of a fissurectomy in patients undergoing this operation.

METHODS

All consecutive patients with idiopathic anal fissure referred to a single expert proctologist at our tertiary center from October 2008 through October 2011 were recruited in the primary cohort. All of them were initially managed according to the same conservative standard protocol, namely, medical treatment including laxative agents for constipation or loperamide for diarrhea, pain killers tailored to the visual analogue scale, and local ointments. All patients were assessed 4 to 6 weeks after the first visit, and surgical treatment was offered in the case of refractory symptoms. Patients with infected fissures were secondarily excluded. Patients with other significant proctologic conditions were also not included in the final study sample.

All patients that accepted surgery according to the indication defined above underwent surgery in the lithotomy position under general or spinal anesthesia. Prophylactic parenteral antibiotics were administered just before the procedure according to a standardized protocol. The fissurectomy was performed using an electric scalpel, with the dissection starting by an incision of the anal verge below the edge of the fissure, then surrounding it, and eventually going above the dentate line (Fig. 1). Any associated skin tag was removed within the same piece of tissue. Hemostasis was achieved as needed, and the wound was left open (Fig. 2). Patients were discharged on the same day, and all of them were given a standard prescription for laxatives and local ointment so as to lubricate the anal canal and foremost to maintain its elasticity and avoid stenosis.

Patients were seen in the clinic every 2 weeks after discharge. The main outcome measures were the success rate and postoperative anal continence. Treatment was considered successful if the patient was painless and the wound was healed. Continence was assessed by using the Wexner score [12] both in the preoperative setting and after surgery. Final data were reviewed by an independent observer according to a pre-established questionnaire.

In France, the fissurectomy has been the standard of care for a chronic anal fissure for a long time; therefore, this study did not require any authorization from an ethics committee according to French ethics law. Nevertheless, all patients gave written informed consent to be included. This study was submitted to the French National Commission for Data Protection (Commission Nationale Informatique et Libertés), and a guarantee was given that data would be kept anonymous and confidential.

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. This study was performed in accordance with French ethics law. All patients gave written informed consent to be included.

All statistical analyses were performed with SAS ver. 9 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA). Continuous data are given as means (standard deviations) or medians (ranges), and categorical data as the numbers of observations and the ratios.

RESULTS

Three hundred forty-nine consecutive patients were seen by the principal investigator for an anal fissure during the study period as described above. Demographics and clinical characteristics are presented in Table 1. Fig. 3 displays the flow chart leading to the final sample of 50 patients solely operated on by using a fissurectomy and eventually assessed.

Among the 50 patients that underwent surgery and were assessed in the final sample, 47 were cured at the end of the primary follow-up (94%). The mean time for obtaining wound healing was 10.3 ± 4.96 weeks. All patients were free of pain at day 42. Two patients (4%) were classified as fissurectomy failures: one due to nonhealing and one related to a postoperative intersphincteric fistula that needed a reoperation. One patient (2%) was lost to follow-up. Among the 47 patients described above, 44 (93.6%) were considered as sustainably cured, which was confirmed through long-term telephone calls (median time, 11.7 months from the end of healing; range, 5.7–15.2), and 3 (6.4%) experienced fissure recurrence that was successfully managed through medical treatment.

Detailed data regarding the preoperative and the postoperative Wexner scores are presented in Table 2. In summary, 47 patients among the 50 that underwent surgery did not see any change in their Wexner scores, and the 2 remaining patients that could be assessed had a postoperative Wexner score of 2. Overall, when the whole sample of patients was considered, the continence score after surgery was not statistically different from that before surgery.

DISCUSSION

In our study of 50 patients operated on by using a fissurectomy for chronic idiopathic anal fissure over a 4-year period, we found that the cure rate was high, that relief of pain was quickly obtained, and that postoperative continence was unaffected by the surgery. Our study has several strengths as compared to previous studies. First, the study involved a prospective cohort, and the overall clinical pathway followed by the patients from diagnosis of the anal fissure to the operation and its outcome could be recorded. Second, a careful selection was made so as to lead to a homogeneous cohort of patients with idiopathic anal fissures, and all patients undergoing the fissurectomy were operated on by a single expert practitioner, thereby enhancing the internal validity of our study. Late follow-up and data collection were performed by an independent observer.

Our findings raise several important issues worth considering about fissure management. First, our operation rate was low as compared to most operation rates in similar reports in the scientific literature. Eventually, about 15% of the patients were solely operated on for a chronic idiopathic and noninfected anal fissure refractory to medical management whereas most authors state an intervention rate of approximately 50%. Second, our healing rate was high. This is likely to revive the debate regarding the place of alternative techniques to the lateral internal sphincterotomy in the modern therapeutic strategy. Even though our technique was associated with delayed complete healing, of note is that pain relief, which is the outcome relevant to the patients, was substantially faster. This finding is consistent with those in prior reports [13]. Third, no significant deleterious effect on anal continence was observed. This latter finding is another argument relevant to the controversy about the surgical treatment of choice. Indeed, the most notable negative impact of the lateral internal sphincterotomy is its mid- and long-term risk of incontinence, which, although variably measured, has been repeatedly found to be substantial in many series and whose management is frequently tricky. Therefore, the fact that the fissurectomy seems unlikely to alter continence should actually be considered as a strength of this technique.

Our findings regarding the effectiveness of the fissurectomy are consistent with the results found in other analogous reports. Most comparative studies with the lateral internal sphincterotomy also showed similar outcomes [13-16]. Therefore, we argue that now a substantial body of evidence exists supporting the use of this technique alternatively to the lateral internal sphincterotomy because of its favorable benefits-risk balance. We recognize that the lateral internal sphincterotomy still has advantages over the fissurectomy, such as the speed of recovery, the absence of pain in most patients, and its effectiveness. Nevertheless, we believe that the associated risk of continence disorders is not acceptable given the benign status of the condition of origin, the existence of reliable alternative techniques, and the almost incurable status of postoperative incontinence. We argue that, at least, the choice should be offered to patients within the frame of the decision-making process. Lastly, personal observation suggests that the intraoperative use of an anal retractor is likely to engender a certain degree of di-latation of the anal canal, thereby providing immediate pain relief and partly addressing the pathophysiology of the anal fissure. This is also supported by previous reports [17].

Our study has several limitations. First, it is a noncontrolled study, so direct comparison with the technique of reference is not possible. Second, many patients of the initial sample were finally excluded from the analysis; nevertheless, that allowed us to study a highly homogeneous sample of patients treated with a fissurectomy. Last, although we rigorously evaluated preoperative and postoperative continence through a recognized benchmark score, we failed to assess the quality of life before and after surgery.

We found that a fissurectomy indicated for a chronic idiopathic anal fissure is associated with a rapid relief of anal pain, a high healing rate, and a lack of deleterious consequences on anal continence. Those findings provide some reassurance that a chronic anal fissure can, indeed, be cured with an acceptable postoperative course and no substantial risk to continence. The fissurectomy should be fully incorporated in the current surgical armamentarium for the management of patients with an anal fissure.

ARTICLE INFORMATION

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.

Fig. 1.

Intraoperative view of a fissurectomy.

Fig. 2.

Postoperative view of the wound.

Fig. 3.

Study flow chart.

Table 1.

Patients’ characteristics at the different stages of the study (n = 349)

Characteristic	Value
Initial sample of 349 patients
Age (yr)	44.9 (16–87)
Men	184 (52.7)
Posterior location	289 (82.8)
Anterior location	42 (12)
Both posterior and anterior location	18 (5.2)
Surgery sample (n = 50; 14.3)
Age (yr)	42.3 (16–87)
Men	31 (62)
Posterior location	45 (90)
Anterior location	5 (10)
Smoking	9 (64.3)
Previous history of proctologic surgery	5 (10)
Time lag from fissure onset (wk)	84 (2.1–622.7)
Preoperative anal hypertonia at digital rectal examination	41 (82)
Surgical indication
Failure of medical management	41 (82)
Recurrence after treatment discontinuation	9 (18)
Intraoperative features
Type of anesthesia
Spinal	33 (66)
General	17 (34)
Postoperative and follow-up data
Clinical follow-up (wk)	15.9 (4.3–62.6)
Initial outcome
Initial cure	47 (94)
Initial failure	2 (4)
Loss of follow-up	1 (2)
Long-term outcome
Long-lasting cure	44 (88)
Recurrence	3 (6)
Time before wound healing (wk)	10.3 (5.7–36.4)
Pain relief at week 42	50 (100)

Values are presented as mean (range) or number (%).

Table 2.

Comparison of pre- and postoperative continence

Continence data	Value
Preoperative Wexner score	0 (0–0)
Postoperative Wexner score	0.8 (0–2)
Patients with unchanged Wexner score after surgery	47 (94)

Values are presented as mean (range) or number (%).

REFERENCES

1. Cross KL, Massey EJ, Fowler AL, Monson JR; ACPGBI. The management of anal fissure: ACPGBI position statement. Colorectal Dis 2008;10 Suppl 3:1–7.Article PubMed
2. Perry WB, Dykes SL, Buie WD, Rafferty JF; Standards Practice Task Force of the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons. Practice parameters for the management of anal fissures (3rd revision). Dis Colon Rectum 2010;53:1110–5.Article PubMed
3. Altomare DF, Binda GA, Canuti S, Landolfi V, Trompetto M, Villani RD. The management of patients with primary chronic anal fissure: a position paper. Tech Coloproctol 2011;15:135–41.Article PubMed PMC
4. Garg P, Garg M, Menon GR. Long-term continence disturbance after lateral internal sphincterotomy for chronic anal fissure: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Colorectal Dis 2013;15:e104–17.Article PubMed
5. García-Granero E, Sanahuja A, García-Botello SA, Faiz O, Esclápez P, Espí A, et al. The ideal lateral internal sphincterotomy: clinical and endosonographic evaluation following open and closed internal anal sphincterotomy. Colorectal Dis 2009;11:502–7.Article PubMed
6. Renzi A, Izzo D, Di Sarno G, Talento P, Torelli F, Izzo G, et al. Clinical, manometric, and ultrasonographic results of pneumatic balloon dilatation vs. lateral internal sphincterotomy for chronic anal fissure: a prospective, randomized, controlled trial. Dis Colon Rectum 2008;51:121–7.Article PubMed
7. Pelta AE, Davis KG, Armstrong DN. Subcutaneous fissurotomy: a novel procedure for chronic fissure-in-ano. a review of 109 cases. Dis Colon Rectum 2007;50:1662–7.Article PubMed
8. Schornagel IL, Witvliet M, Engel AF. Five-year results of fissurectomy for chronic anal fissure: low recurrence rate and minimal effect on continence. Colorectal Dis 2012;14:997–1000.Article PubMed
9. Abramowitz L, Bouchard D, Souffran M, Devulder F, Ganansia R, Castinel A, et al. Sphincter-sparing anal-fissure surgery: a 1-year prospective, observational, multicentre study of fissurectomy with anoplasty. Colorectal Dis 2013;15:359–67.Article PubMed
10. Magdy A, El Nakeeb A, Fouda el Y, Youssef M, Farid M. Comparative study of conventional lateral internal sphincterotomy, V-Y anoplasty, and tailored lateral internal sphincterotomy with V-Y anoplasty in the treatment of chronic anal fissure. J Gastrointest Surg 2012;16:1955–62.Article PubMed
11. Lambe GF, Driver CP, Morton S, Turnock RR. Fissurectomy as a treatment for anal fissures in children. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2000;82:254–7.PubMed PMC
12. Jorge JM, Wexner SD. Etiology and management of fecal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum 1993;36:77–97.Article PubMed
13. Patel SD, Oxenham T, Praveen BV. Medium-term results of anal advancement flap compared with lateral sphincterotomy for the treatment of anal fissure. Int J Colorectal Dis 2011;26:1211–4.Article PubMed
14. Leong AF, Seow-Choen F. Lateral sphincterotomy compared with anal advancement flap for chronic anal fissure. Dis Colon Rectum 1995;38:69–71.Article PubMed
15. Mousavi SR, Sharifi M, Mehdikhah Z. A comparison between the results of fissurectomy and lateral internal sphincterotomy in the surgical management of chronic anal fissure. J Gastrointest Surg 2009;13:1279–82.Article PubMed
16. Hancke E, Rikas E, Suchan K, Völke K. Dermal flap coverage for chronic anal fissure: lower incidence of anal incontinence compared to lateral internal sphincterotomy after long-term follow-up. Dis Colon Rectum 2010;53:1563–8.Article PubMed
17. Zimmerman DD, Gosselink MP, Hop WC, Darby M, Briel JW, Schouten WR. Impact of two different types of anal retractor on fecal continence after fistula repair: a prospective, randomized, clinical trial. Dis Colon Rectum 2003;46:1674–9.Article PubMed

Figure & Data

References

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

The use of a methylene blue and glyceryl trinitrate-based cream for the treatment of chronic anal fissures: a phase II randomized pilot trial from a referral coloproctological unit
P. Lobascio, G. Tomasicchio, N. Cassetta, D. F. Altomare, G. Gallo, A. Pezzolla, R. Laforgia
Techniques in Coloproctology.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Belgian consensus guideline on the management of anal fissures
P Roelandt, G Bislenghi, G Coremans, D De Looze, M.A. Denis, H De Schepper, P Dewint, J Geldof, I Gijsen, N Komen, H Ruymbeke, J Stijns, M Surmont, D Van de Putte, S Van den Broeck, B Van Geluwe, J Wyndaele
Acta Gastro Enterologica Belgica.2024; 87(2): 304. CrossRef
Use of Botulinum Toxin Injections for the Treatment of Chronic Anal Fissure: Results From an American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons Survey
Daniel J. Borsuk, Adam Studniarek, John J. Park, Slawomir J. Marecik, Anders Mellgren, Kunal Kochar
The American Surgeon™.2023; 89(3): 346. CrossRef
New Findings at the Internal Anal Sphincter on Cadaveric Dissection and Review of Sphincter-Related Surgery in a Newer Prospective
Aswini Kumar Pujahari
Indian Journal of Surgery.2023; 85(3): 585. CrossRef
Pelvic floor physical therapy in patients with chronic anal fissure: long-term follow-up of a randomized controlled trial
Daniëlle A. van Reijn-Baggen, Henk W. Elzevier, H. Putter, Rob C. M. Pelger, Ingrid J. M. Han-Geurts
International Journal of Colorectal Disease.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Fissurectomy with mucosal advancement flap anoplasty: The end of a dogma?
M. Skoufou, J.H. Lefèvre, A. Fels, N. Fathallah, P. Benfredj, V. de Parades
Journal of Visceral Surgery.2023; 160(5): 330. CrossRef
Fissurectomy versus lateral internal sphincterotomy in the treatment of chronic anal fissures: no advantages in terms of post-operative incontinence
Roberta Tutino, Casimiro Nigro, Flavia Paternostro, Rosa Federico, Giacomo Lo Secco, Gaetano Gallo, Mauro Santarelli, Gianfranco Cocorullo, Sebastiano Bonventre
Techniques in Coloproctology.2023; 27(10): 885. CrossRef
The Italian Unitary Society of Colon-proctology (SIUCP: Società Italiana Unitaria di Colonproctologia) guidelines for the management of anal fissure
Antonio Brillantino, Adolfo Renzi, Pasquale Talento, Francesca Iacobellis, Luigi Brusciano, Luigi Monaco, Domenico Izzo, Alfredo Giordano, Michele Pinto, Corrado Fantini, Marcello Gasparrini, Michele Schiano Di Visconte, Francesca Milazzo, Giovanni Ferrer
BMC Surgery.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
La fissurectomie avec anoplastie muqueuse : la fin d’un dogme ?
Maria Skoufou, Jérémie H. Lefèvre, Audrey Fels, Nadia Fathallah, Paul Benfredj, Vincent de Parades
Journal de Chirurgie Viscérale.2023; 160(5): 363. CrossRef
Modified open posterior internal sphincterotomy with sliding skin graft for chronic anal fissure and anal stenosis: Low recurrence rate and no serious faecal incontinence postoperative complication
Y. Iida, K. Honda, R. Iida, H. Saitou, Y. Munemoto, A. Tanaka, H. Tanaka
Journal of Visceral Surgery.2022; 159(4): 267. CrossRef
Sphinctérotomie interne postérieure modifiée avec un lambeau cutané pour fissure anale et sténose anale : peu de récidives et d’incontinence anale
Y. Iida, K. Honda, R. Iida, H. Saitou, Y. Munemoto, A. Tanaka, H. Tanaka
Journal de Chirurgie Viscérale.2022; 159(4): 283. CrossRef
Injection of botulinum toxin significantly increases efficiency of fissurectomy in the treatment of chronic anal fissures
Philip Roelandt, Georges Coremans, Jan Wyndaele
International Journal of Colorectal Disease.2022; 37(2): 309. CrossRef
Clinical Trial Combining Botulinum Toxin A Injection and Fissurectomy for Chronic Anal Fissure: A Dose-Dependent Study
Nuha Alsaleh, Abdullah I. Aljunaydil, Gaida A. Aljamili
Journal of Coloproctology.2022; 42(02): 167. CrossRef
Fisurectomy and anoplasty with botulinum toxin injection in patients with chronic anal posterior fissure with hypertonia: a long-term evaluation
Beatrice D’Orazio, Girolamo Geraci, Guido Martorana, Carmelo Sciumé, Giovanni Corbo, Gaetano Di Vita
Updates in Surgery.2021; 73(4): 1575. CrossRef
The comparison between the medical and the surgical management of chronic anal fissures
Navneet Mishra, Kamal Kishore Parmar, Tanweerul Huda
Journal of Clinical and Investigative Surgery.2021; 6(1): 11. CrossRef
Anocutaneous advancement flap provides a quicker cure than fissurectomy in surgical treatment for chronic anal fissure—a retrospective, observational study
Edgar Hancke, Katrin Suchan, Knut Voelke
Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery.2021; 406(8): 2861. CrossRef
Fissurectomy Versus Lateral Internal Sphincterotomy in the Treatment of Chronic Anal Fissure: A Randomized Control Trial
Bipin Kishore Bara, Sujit Kumar Mohanty, Satya Narayan Behera, Ashok Kumar Sahoo, Santanu Kumar Swain
Cureus.2021;[Epub] CrossRef
Botulinum toxin associated with fissurectomy and anoplasty for hypertonic chronic anal fissure: A case-control study
Beatrice D'Orazio, Girolamo Geraci, Fausto Famà, Gloria Terranova, Gaetano Di Vita
World Journal of Clinical Cases.2021; 9(32): 9722. CrossRef
Scanner-Assisted CO2 Laser Fissurectomy: A Pilot Study
Iacopo Giani, Tommaso Cioppa, Chiara Linari, Filippo Caminati, Paolo Dreoni, Gianni Rossi, Cinzia Tanda, Giuseppina Talamo, Federico Bettazzi, Alessandra Aprile, Silvia Grassi, Antonella Pede, Luca Giannoni, Claudio Elbetti
Frontiers in Surgery.2021;[Epub] CrossRef
Fissurectomy combined with botulinum toxin A: a review of short- and long-term efficacy of this treatment strategy for chronic anal fissure; a consecutive proposal of a treatment algorithm for chronic anal fissure
M. Trzpis, J. M. Klaase, R. H. Koop, P. M. A. Broens
coloproctology.2020; 42(5): 400. CrossRef

PubReader
ePub Link

Cite this Article

Cite this Article: export Copy Download Format; Close

Download Citation

Download a citation file in RIS format that can be imported by all major citation management software, including EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and Reference Manager.

Format:

RIS — For EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and most other reference management software
BibTeX — For JabRef, BibDesk, and other BibTeX-specific software

Include:

Citation for the content below
Citation and abstract for the content below

Long-term Outcome of a Fissurectomy: A Prospective Single-Arm Study of 50 Operations out of 349 Initial Patients

Ann Coloproctol. 2018;34(2):83-87. Published online April 30, 2018

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3393/ac.2017.06.12

XML Download

Figure

Long-term Outcome of a Fissurectomy: A Prospective Single-Arm Study of 50 Operations out of 349 Initial Patients

Fig. 1. Intraoperative view of a fissurectomy.

Fig. 2. Postoperative view of the wound.

Fig. 3. Study flow chart.

Fig. 1.

Fig. 2.

Fig. 3.

Long-term Outcome of a Fissurectomy: A Prospective Single-Arm Study of 50 Operations out of 349 Initial Patients

Characteristic	Value
Initial sample of 349 patients
Age (yr)	44.9 (16–87)
Men	184 (52.7)
Posterior location	289 (82.8)
Anterior location	42 (12)
Both posterior and anterior location	18 (5.2)
Surgery sample (n = 50; 14.3)
Age (yr)	42.3 (16–87)
Men	31 (62)
Posterior location	45 (90)
Anterior location	5 (10)
Smoking	9 (64.3)
Previous history of proctologic surgery	5 (10)
Time lag from fissure onset (wk)	84 (2.1–622.7)
Preoperative anal hypertonia at digital rectal examination	41 (82)
Surgical indication
Failure of medical management	41 (82)
Recurrence after treatment discontinuation	9 (18)
Intraoperative features
Type of anesthesia
Spinal	33 (66)
General	17 (34)
Postoperative and follow-up data
Clinical follow-up (wk)	15.9 (4.3–62.6)
Initial outcome
Initial cure	47 (94)
Initial failure	2 (4)
Loss of follow-up	1 (2)
Long-term outcome
Long-lasting cure	44 (88)
Recurrence	3 (6)
Time before wound healing (wk)	10.3 (5.7–36.4)
Pain relief at week 42	50 (100)

Continence data	Value
Preoperative Wexner score	0 (0–0)
Postoperative Wexner score	0.8 (0–2)
Patients with unchanged Wexner score after surgery	47 (94)

Table 1. Patients’ characteristics at the different stages of the study (n = 349)

Values are presented as mean (range) or number (%).

Table 2. Comparison of pre- and postoperative continence

Values are presented as mean (range) or number (%).