Suppr超能文献

经括约肌间瘘管置管或胶堵术:前瞻性随机交叉临床试验。

Seton or glue for trans-sphincteric anal fistulae: a prospective randomized crossover clinical trial.

机构信息

Department of Emergency and Organ Transplantation, University of Bari, Italy.

出版信息

Colorectal Dis. 2011 Jan;13(1):82-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2009.02056.x.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Fibrin glue treatment of anal fistulae has been proposed to minimize the risk of faecal incontinence but its acceptance by coloproctologists is still poor because the published data is controversial. Therefore, we carried out a prospective randomized crossover trial comparing treatment with a commercial fibrin glue to classical seton treatment, with healing rate, hospital stay, healing time, faecal incontinence and postoperative pain as study outcomes.

METHOD

Sixty-four homogeneous patients with trans-sphincteric anal fistulae referred to seven colorectal units were randomized to undergo fibrin glue (39 patients) or seton (25 patients) treatment. Patients failing to heal after treatment with fibrin glue were re-randomized to undergo a second injection with glue or seton treatment.

RESULTS

Sixty-two of the 64 patients completed the minimum 1-year follow-up period. Twenty-one of 24 patients healed in the seton group compared with 15/38 in the fibrin glue group (P = 0.0007). The 23 failures after glue treatment were re-randomized to have a second glue injection (eight patients) or a seton treatment (15 patients). Four of the eight (50%) patients treated with a second injection of glue, and nine out of the 15 (60%) patients in the seton group, healed. Patients treated with fibrin glue reported less postoperative pain and had a shorter hospital stay than patients treated with a seton; furthermore, faecal continence and anal manometry significantly worsened after seton treatment.

CONCLUSION

Seton treatment has a significantly higher probability of success compared with fibrin glue treatment but poses a higher risk of faecal incontinence. Fibrin glue could be considered as a first line of treatment for patients at risk of faecal incontinence or other comorbidities.

摘要

目的

纤维蛋白胶治疗肛瘘被认为可最大程度降低粪便失禁的风险,但肛肠病医生对此的接受程度仍然较低,因为已发表的数据存在争议。因此,我们进行了一项前瞻性随机交叉试验,比较了纤维蛋白胶治疗与经典挂线治疗的效果,以愈合率、住院时间、愈合时间、粪便失禁和术后疼痛为研究结果。

方法

64 例同质的经括约肌肛瘘患者被随机分配到 7 个大肠直肠单位,分别接受纤维蛋白胶(39 例)或挂线(25 例)治疗。接受纤维蛋白胶治疗未愈合的患者,再次随机接受第二次胶注或挂线治疗。

结果

64 例患者中有 62 例完成了至少 1 年的随访。挂线组 24 例中有 21 例愈合,而纤维蛋白胶组 38 例中有 15 例愈合(P=0.0007)。胶注治疗失败的 23 例患者再次随机接受第二次胶注(8 例)或挂线治疗(15 例)。8 例接受第二次胶注的患者中有 4 例(50%),15 例接受挂线治疗的患者中有 9 例(60%)愈合。接受纤维蛋白胶治疗的患者报告的术后疼痛较轻,住院时间较短,而接受挂线治疗的患者的粪便失禁和肛门测压显著恶化。

结论

与纤维蛋白胶治疗相比,挂线治疗的成功率明显更高,但粪便失禁的风险更高。纤维蛋白胶可考虑作为粪便失禁或其他合并症风险较高的患者的一线治疗方法。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验