Anal fistula plug vs mucosa advancement flap in complex fistula-in-ano: A meta-analysis.

AIM

To investigate the efficacy of the anal fistula plug (AFP) compared to the mucosa advancement flap (MAF), considered the best procedure for patients with a complex anal fistula.

METHODS

The literature search included PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and OVID original studies on the topic of AFP compared to MAF for complex fistula-in-ano that had a deadline for publication by April 2011. Randomized controlled trials, controlled clinical trials and prospective cohort studies were included in the review. After information collection, a meta-analysis was performed using data on overall success rates as well as incidence of incontinence and morbidity. The quality of postoperative life was also included with the clinical results.

RESULTS

Six studies involving 408 patients (AFP = 167, MAF = 241) were included in the meta-analysis. The differences in the overall success rates and incidence of fistula recurrence were not statistically significant between the AFP and MAF [risk difference (RD) = -0.12, 95%CI: -0.39 - 0.14; RD = 0.13; 95%CI: -0.18 - 0.43, respectively]. However, for the AFP, the risk of postoperative impaired continence was lower (RD = -0.08, 95%CI: -0.15 - -0.02) as was the incidence of other complications (RD = -0.06, 95%CI: -0.11 - -0.00). The postoperative quality of life, for patients treated using the AFP was superior to that of the MAF patients. Patients treated with the AFP had less persistent pain of a shorter duration and the healing time of the fistula and hospital stay were also reduced.

CONCLUSION

The AFP is an effective procedure for patients with a complex anal fistula; it has the same success rate but a lower risk of complications than the MAF and may also be associated with an improved postoperative quality of life. Additional evidence is needed to confirm these findings.