Cutting seton for the treatment of cryptoglandular fistula-in-ano: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Background The use of cutting seton (CS) for the management of cryptoglandular fistula-in-ano has remained controversial because of reports of fecal incontinence, postoperative pain, and extended healing time. The aim of this review was to provide the first synthesis of studies investigating the use...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Techniques in coloproctology 2024-12, Vol.28 (1), p.12, Article 12 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 12 |
container_title | Techniques in coloproctology |
container_volume | 28 |
creator | Khamar, J. Sachdeva, A. McKechnie, T. Lee, Y. Tessier, L. Hong, D. Eskicioglu, C. |
description | Background
The use of cutting seton (CS) for the management of cryptoglandular fistula-in-ano has remained controversial because of reports of fecal incontinence, postoperative pain, and extended healing time. The aim of this review was to provide the first synthesis of studies investigating the use of CS for the treatment of cryptoglandular fistula-in-ano.
Methods
MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL were searched up to October 2022. Randomized controlled trials and observational studies comparing CS with alternative interventions were included, along with single-arm studies evaluating CS alone. The primary outcome was fistula-in-ano recurrence, and secondary outcomes included incontinence, healing time, proportion with complete healing, and postoperative pain. Inverse variance random-effects meta-analyses were used to pool effect estimates.
Results
After screening 661 citations, 29 studies were included. Overall, 1513 patients undergoing CS (18.8% female, mean age: 43.1 years) were included. Patients with CS had a 6% (95% CI: 3–12%) risk of recurrence and a 16% (95% CI: 5–38%) risk of incontinence at 6 months. CS patients had an average healing time of 14.6 weeks (95% CI: 10–19 weeks) with 73% (95% CI: 48–89%) of patients achieving complete healing at 6 months postoperatively. There was no difference in recurrence between CS and fistulotomy, advancement flap, two-stage seton fistulotomy, or draining seton.
Conclusions
Overall, this analysis shows that CS has comparable recurrence and incontinence rates to other modalities. However, this may be at the expense of more postoperative pain and extended healing time. Further comparative studies between CS and other modalities are warranted. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s10151-023-02886-z |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2902954564</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2902954564</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-269e2c1a391edccc7bd08eb8d59ab55cd65f47d22dabbda72b6bb160ca5054923</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kU1r3DAQhkVIyfcf6KEIculFjT4sy-6tLG0SCOTSQG5CH-NdL7a1keSWza-Pups20EMOwwzMM-8M8yL0kdEvjFJ1lRhlkhHKRYmmqcnzATphjDeEVvLxcFcLUguhjtFpSmtKmVKSHaFj0dC2NOUJWi3mnPtpiRPkMOEuRJxXgHMEk0eYMg4ddnG7yWE5mMnPg4m461MuBeknYqbwFRuctinDaHLvcIRfPfzGhcUjZFMIM2xTn87Rh84MCS5e8xl6-PH95-KG3N1f3y6-3REnlMyE1y1wx4xoGXjnnLKeNmAbL1tjpXS-ll2lPOfeWOuN4ra2ltXUGUll1XJxhj7vdTcxPM2Qsh775GAo10OYk-Yt5a2sZF0V9PI_dB3mWO7dUaxSknNaKL6nXAwpRej0JvajiVvNqP7jg977oIsPeueDfi5Dn16lZzuC_zfy9_EFEHsglda0hPi2-x3ZF36UlX4</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2901475220</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Cutting seton for the treatment of cryptoglandular fistula-in-ano: a systematic review and meta-analysis</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerLink Journals</source><creator>Khamar, J. ; Sachdeva, A. ; McKechnie, T. ; Lee, Y. ; Tessier, L. ; Hong, D. ; Eskicioglu, C.</creator><creatorcontrib>Khamar, J. ; Sachdeva, A. ; McKechnie, T. ; Lee, Y. ; Tessier, L. ; Hong, D. ; Eskicioglu, C.</creatorcontrib><description>Background
The use of cutting seton (CS) for the management of cryptoglandular fistula-in-ano has remained controversial because of reports of fecal incontinence, postoperative pain, and extended healing time. The aim of this review was to provide the first synthesis of studies investigating the use of CS for the treatment of cryptoglandular fistula-in-ano.
Methods
MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL were searched up to October 2022. Randomized controlled trials and observational studies comparing CS with alternative interventions were included, along with single-arm studies evaluating CS alone. The primary outcome was fistula-in-ano recurrence, and secondary outcomes included incontinence, healing time, proportion with complete healing, and postoperative pain. Inverse variance random-effects meta-analyses were used to pool effect estimates.
Results
After screening 661 citations, 29 studies were included. Overall, 1513 patients undergoing CS (18.8% female, mean age: 43.1 years) were included. Patients with CS had a 6% (95% CI: 3–12%) risk of recurrence and a 16% (95% CI: 5–38%) risk of incontinence at 6 months. CS patients had an average healing time of 14.6 weeks (95% CI: 10–19 weeks) with 73% (95% CI: 48–89%) of patients achieving complete healing at 6 months postoperatively. There was no difference in recurrence between CS and fistulotomy, advancement flap, two-stage seton fistulotomy, or draining seton.
Conclusions
Overall, this analysis shows that CS has comparable recurrence and incontinence rates to other modalities. However, this may be at the expense of more postoperative pain and extended healing time. Further comparative studies between CS and other modalities are warranted.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1123-6337</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1128-045X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1128-045X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s10151-023-02886-z</identifier><identifier>PMID: 38091125</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cham: Springer International Publishing</publisher><subject>Abdominal Surgery ; Adult ; Colorectal Surgery ; Drainage ; Fecal incontinence ; Fecal Incontinence - complications ; Fecal Incontinence - surgery ; Female ; Fistula ; Follow-Up Studies ; Gastroenterology ; Humans ; Male ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Pain, Postoperative - etiology ; Proctology ; Rectal Fistula - etiology ; Recurrence ; Review ; Surgery ; Surgical outcomes ; Treatment Outcome</subject><ispartof>Techniques in coloproctology, 2024-12, Vol.28 (1), p.12, Article 12</ispartof><rights>Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.</rights><rights>2023. Springer Nature Switzerland AG.</rights><rights>Copyright Springer Nature B.V. 2024</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-269e2c1a391edccc7bd08eb8d59ab55cd65f47d22dabbda72b6bb160ca5054923</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-269e2c1a391edccc7bd08eb8d59ab55cd65f47d22dabbda72b6bb160ca5054923</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-3920-066X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10151-023-02886-z$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10151-023-02886-z$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902,41464,42533,51294</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38091125$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Khamar, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sachdeva, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McKechnie, T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lee, Y.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tessier, L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hong, D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Eskicioglu, C.</creatorcontrib><title>Cutting seton for the treatment of cryptoglandular fistula-in-ano: a systematic review and meta-analysis</title><title>Techniques in coloproctology</title><addtitle>Tech Coloproctol</addtitle><addtitle>Tech Coloproctol</addtitle><description>Background
The use of cutting seton (CS) for the management of cryptoglandular fistula-in-ano has remained controversial because of reports of fecal incontinence, postoperative pain, and extended healing time. The aim of this review was to provide the first synthesis of studies investigating the use of CS for the treatment of cryptoglandular fistula-in-ano.
Methods
MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL were searched up to October 2022. Randomized controlled trials and observational studies comparing CS with alternative interventions were included, along with single-arm studies evaluating CS alone. The primary outcome was fistula-in-ano recurrence, and secondary outcomes included incontinence, healing time, proportion with complete healing, and postoperative pain. Inverse variance random-effects meta-analyses were used to pool effect estimates.
Results
After screening 661 citations, 29 studies were included. Overall, 1513 patients undergoing CS (18.8% female, mean age: 43.1 years) were included. Patients with CS had a 6% (95% CI: 3–12%) risk of recurrence and a 16% (95% CI: 5–38%) risk of incontinence at 6 months. CS patients had an average healing time of 14.6 weeks (95% CI: 10–19 weeks) with 73% (95% CI: 48–89%) of patients achieving complete healing at 6 months postoperatively. There was no difference in recurrence between CS and fistulotomy, advancement flap, two-stage seton fistulotomy, or draining seton.
Conclusions
Overall, this analysis shows that CS has comparable recurrence and incontinence rates to other modalities. However, this may be at the expense of more postoperative pain and extended healing time. Further comparative studies between CS and other modalities are warranted.</description><subject>Abdominal Surgery</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Colorectal Surgery</subject><subject>Drainage</subject><subject>Fecal incontinence</subject><subject>Fecal Incontinence - complications</subject><subject>Fecal Incontinence - surgery</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Fistula</subject><subject>Follow-Up Studies</subject><subject>Gastroenterology</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Pain, Postoperative - etiology</subject><subject>Proctology</subject><subject>Rectal Fistula - etiology</subject><subject>Recurrence</subject><subject>Review</subject><subject>Surgery</subject><subject>Surgical outcomes</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><issn>1123-6337</issn><issn>1128-045X</issn><issn>1128-045X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kU1r3DAQhkVIyfcf6KEIculFjT4sy-6tLG0SCOTSQG5CH-NdL7a1keSWza-Pups20EMOwwzMM-8M8yL0kdEvjFJ1lRhlkhHKRYmmqcnzATphjDeEVvLxcFcLUguhjtFpSmtKmVKSHaFj0dC2NOUJWi3mnPtpiRPkMOEuRJxXgHMEk0eYMg4ddnG7yWE5mMnPg4m461MuBeknYqbwFRuctinDaHLvcIRfPfzGhcUjZFMIM2xTn87Rh84MCS5e8xl6-PH95-KG3N1f3y6-3REnlMyE1y1wx4xoGXjnnLKeNmAbL1tjpXS-ll2lPOfeWOuN4ra2ltXUGUll1XJxhj7vdTcxPM2Qsh775GAo10OYk-Yt5a2sZF0V9PI_dB3mWO7dUaxSknNaKL6nXAwpRej0JvajiVvNqP7jg977oIsPeueDfi5Dn16lZzuC_zfy9_EFEHsglda0hPi2-x3ZF36UlX4</recordid><startdate>20241201</startdate><enddate>20241201</enddate><creator>Khamar, J.</creator><creator>Sachdeva, A.</creator><creator>McKechnie, T.</creator><creator>Lee, Y.</creator><creator>Tessier, L.</creator><creator>Hong, D.</creator><creator>Eskicioglu, C.</creator><general>Springer International Publishing</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3920-066X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20241201</creationdate><title>Cutting seton for the treatment of cryptoglandular fistula-in-ano: a systematic review and meta-analysis</title><author>Khamar, J. ; Sachdeva, A. ; McKechnie, T. ; Lee, Y. ; Tessier, L. ; Hong, D. ; Eskicioglu, C.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-269e2c1a391edccc7bd08eb8d59ab55cd65f47d22dabbda72b6bb160ca5054923</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Abdominal Surgery</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Colorectal Surgery</topic><topic>Drainage</topic><topic>Fecal incontinence</topic><topic>Fecal Incontinence - complications</topic><topic>Fecal Incontinence - surgery</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Fistula</topic><topic>Follow-Up Studies</topic><topic>Gastroenterology</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Pain, Postoperative - etiology</topic><topic>Proctology</topic><topic>Rectal Fistula - etiology</topic><topic>Recurrence</topic><topic>Review</topic><topic>Surgery</topic><topic>Surgical outcomes</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Khamar, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sachdeva, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McKechnie, T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lee, Y.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tessier, L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hong, D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Eskicioglu, C.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Techniques in coloproctology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Khamar, J.</au><au>Sachdeva, A.</au><au>McKechnie, T.</au><au>Lee, Y.</au><au>Tessier, L.</au><au>Hong, D.</au><au>Eskicioglu, C.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Cutting seton for the treatment of cryptoglandular fistula-in-ano: a systematic review and meta-analysis</atitle><jtitle>Techniques in coloproctology</jtitle><stitle>Tech Coloproctol</stitle><addtitle>Tech Coloproctol</addtitle><date>2024-12-01</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>28</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>12</spage><pages>12-</pages><artnum>12</artnum><issn>1123-6337</issn><issn>1128-045X</issn><eissn>1128-045X</eissn><abstract>Background
The use of cutting seton (CS) for the management of cryptoglandular fistula-in-ano has remained controversial because of reports of fecal incontinence, postoperative pain, and extended healing time. The aim of this review was to provide the first synthesis of studies investigating the use of CS for the treatment of cryptoglandular fistula-in-ano.
Methods
MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL were searched up to October 2022. Randomized controlled trials and observational studies comparing CS with alternative interventions were included, along with single-arm studies evaluating CS alone. The primary outcome was fistula-in-ano recurrence, and secondary outcomes included incontinence, healing time, proportion with complete healing, and postoperative pain. Inverse variance random-effects meta-analyses were used to pool effect estimates.
Results
After screening 661 citations, 29 studies were included. Overall, 1513 patients undergoing CS (18.8% female, mean age: 43.1 years) were included. Patients with CS had a 6% (95% CI: 3–12%) risk of recurrence and a 16% (95% CI: 5–38%) risk of incontinence at 6 months. CS patients had an average healing time of 14.6 weeks (95% CI: 10–19 weeks) with 73% (95% CI: 48–89%) of patients achieving complete healing at 6 months postoperatively. There was no difference in recurrence between CS and fistulotomy, advancement flap, two-stage seton fistulotomy, or draining seton.
Conclusions
Overall, this analysis shows that CS has comparable recurrence and incontinence rates to other modalities. However, this may be at the expense of more postoperative pain and extended healing time. Further comparative studies between CS and other modalities are warranted.</abstract><cop>Cham</cop><pub>Springer International Publishing</pub><pmid>38091125</pmid><doi>10.1007/s10151-023-02886-z</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3920-066X</orcidid></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1123-6337 |
ispartof | Techniques in coloproctology, 2024-12, Vol.28 (1), p.12, Article 12 |
issn | 1123-6337 1128-045X 1128-045X |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2902954564 |
source | MEDLINE; SpringerLink Journals |
subjects | Abdominal Surgery Adult Colorectal Surgery Drainage Fecal incontinence Fecal Incontinence - complications Fecal Incontinence - surgery Female Fistula Follow-Up Studies Gastroenterology Humans Male Medicine Medicine & Public Health Pain, Postoperative - etiology Proctology Rectal Fistula - etiology Recurrence Review Surgery Surgical outcomes Treatment Outcome |
title | Cutting seton for the treatment of cryptoglandular fistula-in-ano: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-11T07%3A43%3A07IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Cutting%20seton%20for%20the%20treatment%20of%20cryptoglandular%20fistula-in-ano:%20a%20systematic%20review%20and%20meta-analysis&rft.jtitle=Techniques%20in%20coloproctology&rft.au=Khamar,%20J.&rft.date=2024-12-01&rft.volume=28&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=12&rft.pages=12-&rft.artnum=12&rft.issn=1123-6337&rft.eissn=1128-045X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s10151-023-02886-z&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2902954564%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2901475220&rft_id=info:pmid/38091125&rfr_iscdi=true |