-
International Journal of Gynaecology... Jul 2022Women with previous obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASIs) are at a higher risk of recurrence in the subsequent pregnancy, which may lead to the development or... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Women with previous obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASIs) are at a higher risk of recurrence in the subsequent pregnancy, which may lead to the development or worsening of anal incontinence. Due to a lack of evidence, few recommendations can be made about the factors that may affect the risk of OASI recurrence.
OBJECTIVE
We sought to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate potential risk factors for recurrent OASIs.
SEARCH STRATEGY
Studies up to May 2019 were identified from PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and ISI Web of Science.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Studies assessing the impact of risk factors on OASI recurrence in subsequent pregnancies were included. Reviews, letters to the editor, conference abstracts, book chapters, guidelines, Cochrane reviews, and expert opinions were excluded.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Data were extracted by two independent reviewers. Odds ratio and standardized mean difference were chosen as effect measures. Pooled estimates were calculated using the random-effects model.
MAIN RESULTS
The meta-analysis showed that maternal age, gestational age, occiput posterior presentation, oxytocin augmentation, operative delivery, and shoulder dystocia were associated with the risk of recurrent OASIs in the subsequent delivery.
CONCLUSION
Prenatal and intrapartum risk factors are associated with recurrence of OASI. PROSPERO registration no. CRD42020178125.
Topics: Anal Canal; Delivery, Obstetric; Fecal Incontinence; Female; Humans; Obstetric Labor Complications; Perineum; Pregnancy; Risk Factors
PubMed: 34559892
DOI: 10.1002/ijgo.13950 -
Techniques in Coloproctology Apr 2021Simple anal fistula is one of the most common causes of proctological surgery and fistulotomy is considered the gold standard. This procedure, however, may cause... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Simple anal fistula is one of the most common causes of proctological surgery and fistulotomy is considered the gold standard. This procedure, however, may cause complications. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the surgical treatment of simple anal fistula with traditional and sphincter-sparing techniques.
METHODS
A literature research was performed using PubMed, Cochrane, and Google Scholar to identify studies on the surgical treatment of simple anal fistulas. Observational studies and randomized clinical trials were included. We assessed the risk of bias of included studies using the Jadad scale for randomized controlled trials, and the MINORS Scale for the remaining studies.
RESULTS
The search returned 456 records, and 66 studies were found to be eligible. The quality of the studies was generally low. A total of 4883 patients with a simple anal fistula underwent a sphincter-cutting procedure, mainly fistulotomy, with a weighted average healing rate of 93.7%, while any postoperative continence impairment was reported in 12.7% of patients. Sphincter-sparing techniques were adopted to treat 602 patients affected by simple anal fistula, reaching a weighted average success rate of 77.7%, with no study reporting a significant postoperative incontinence rate. The postoperative onset of fecal incontinence and the recurrence of the disease reduced patients' quality of life and satisfaction.
CONCLUSIONS
Surgical treatment of simple anal fistulas with sphincter-cutting procedures provides excellent cure rates, even if postoperative fecal incontinence is not a negligible risk. A sphincter-sparing procedure could be useful in selected patients.
Topics: Anal Canal; Fecal Incontinence; Humans; Organ Sparing Treatments; Quality of Life; Rectal Fistula; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33387100
DOI: 10.1007/s10151-020-02385-5 -
American Journal of Obstetrics and... Aug 2022We aimed to systematically determine the incidences of wound infection and dehiscence after primary obstetric anal sphincter injury repair. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
We aimed to systematically determine the incidences of wound infection and dehiscence after primary obstetric anal sphincter injury repair.
DATA SOURCES
MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, EmCare, the Cochrane Library, and Trip Pro databases were searched from inception to February 2021.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
We included observational clinical studies reporting the incidences of wound infection and dehiscence after primary obstetric anal sphincter injury repair. Case series and reports were excluded. Conference articles and observational study abstracts were included if they contained enough information regarding study design and outcome data.
METHODS
Data were analyzed as incidence (percentage) with 95% confidence intervals. Moreover, the prediction intervals were calculated to provide a predicted range for the potential incidence of wound complications when applied to an individual study setting. Study quality and risk of bias were assessed using the relevant tool from the Joanna Briggs Institute.
RESULTS
Of 956 studies found, 39 were selected for full-text review. Moreover, 10 studies (n=4767 women) were eligible and included in the meta-analysis. All 10 studies were conducted in high-income countries (Denmark [n=1], the United Kingdom [n=3], and the United States [n=6]). The incidences of wound infection (n=4593 women) and wound dehiscence (n=3866 women) after primary obstetric anal sphincter injury repair ranged between 0.1% to 19.8% and 1.9% to 24.6%, respectively. The overall incidences were 4.4% (95% confidence interval, 0.4-8.4) for wound infection and 6.9% (95% confidence interval, 1.6-12.2) for wound dehiscence. The prediction intervals were wide and suggested that the true incidences of wound infection and dehiscence in future studies could lie between 0.0% to 11.7% and 0.0% to 16.4%, respectively. Overall, 8 studies had a high or unclear risk of bias across ≥1 assessed element. None of the studies used the same set of clinical parameters to define wound infection or dehiscence. Furthermore, microbiological confirmation with wound swabs was never used as a diagnostic measure.
CONCLUSION
This was a systematic review and meta-analysis of wound infection and dehiscence incidences after primary obstetric anal sphincter injury repair. The incidence estimates from this review will be useful for clinicians when counseling women with obstetric anal sphincter injury and when consenting them for primary surgical repair.
Topics: Anal Canal; Delivery, Obstetric; Fecal Incontinence; Female; Humans; Incidence; Observational Studies as Topic; Obstetric Labor Complications; Perineum; Pregnancy; United Kingdom; Wound Infection
PubMed: 35550375
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2022.05.012 -
American Journal of Obstetrics &... Aug 2023Between 53% and 79% of women will sustain some degree of perineal laceration during vaginal delivery. Third- and fourth-degree perineal lacerations are known as... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
Between 53% and 79% of women will sustain some degree of perineal laceration during vaginal delivery. Third- and fourth-degree perineal lacerations are known as obstetric anal sphincter injuries. Timely diagnosis and prompt treatment of obstetric anal sphincter injuries can help to prevent the development of severe consequences like fecal incontinence, urinary incontinence, and rectovaginal fistula. Neonatal head circumference is routinely measured postpartum but is often not mentioned as a risk factor for obstetric anal sphincter injuries in clinical guidelines. Thus far, no review article on the risk factors for obstetric anal sphincter injuries has discussed the role of neonatal head circumference. This study aimed to review and analyze the relationship between head circumference and the occurrence of obstetric anal sphincter injuries among previous studies to conclude whether head circumference should be recognized as an important risk factor.
DATA SOURCES
Through study screening on Google Scholar, PubMed, Scopus, and Science Direct for articles published between 2013 to 2023, followed by assessment of eligibility, this study ended up reviewing 25 studies, 17 of which were included in the meta-analysis.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Only studies that reported both the neonatal head circumference and the occurrence of obstetric anal sphincter injuries were included in this review.
METHODS
The included studies were appraised using the Dartmouth Library risk of bias assessment checklist. Qualitative synthesis was based on the study population, findings, adjusted confounding factors, and suggested causative links in each study. Quantitative synthesis was conducted using calculation and pooling of odds ratios and inverse variance using Review Manager 5.4.1.
RESULTS
A statistically significant association between head circumference and obstetric anal sphincter injuries was reported in 21 of 25 studies; 4 studies reported that head circumference was a true independent risk factor. A meta-analysis of the studies that reported neonatal head circumference as a dichotomous categorical variable with a cutoff point of 35±1 cm yielded statistically significant pooled results (odds ratio, 1.92; 95% confidence interval, 1.80-2.04).
CONCLUSION
The risk for obstetric anal sphincter injuries increased as the neonatal head circumference increased-this should be considered in decision-making during labor and postpartum management to attain the best outcome.
Topics: Pregnancy; Infant, Newborn; Humans; Female; Anal Canal; Delivery, Obstetric; Lacerations; Risk Factors; Postpartum Period
PubMed: 37277090
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajogmf.2023.101047 -
Updates in Surgery Dec 2023Anal fistula (AF) is a common disease with high prevalence and surgical operations are effective treatments in clinical work. There exist many well-known surgical... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Anal fistula (AF) is a common disease with high prevalence and surgical operations are effective treatments in clinical work. There exist many well-known surgical techniques treating complex anal fistula (CAF), however, none is ideal. To compare the superiority of Anal fistula plug (AFP) and Endoanal advancement flap repair (EAFR) for complex anal fistula. We searched worldwide databases including Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, WanFang, VIP, and SinoMed from their inception to March 2023. Studies comparing the outcomes of AFP and EAFR were included according to the PICO principles. The indicators of the healing rate, recurrence rate, wound infection rate, and complication rate, et al. were extracted and compared between different surgical methods. 5 RCTS and 7 non-RCTs were included in the meta-analysis with a total of 847 patients (341 patients conducted with AFP and 506 patients with EAFR). By combining the total effect of the 12 articles, we found that there was a statistical difference reporting the healing rate of AFP 48.3% and EAFR 64.4% treating the CAF (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.30,1.55, P = 0.03), and EAFR has a better healing rate. However, there was no significant difference in terms of the recurrence rate (OR 1.68, 95% CI 0.80,3.54, P = 0.17), the wound infection rate (OR 1.82, 95% CI 0.95,3.52, P = 0.07), and the complication rate (OR 1.06, 95% CI 0.70,1.61, P = 0.77) either in the 12 articles or in the subgroup. The meta-analysis indicated that the EAFR was superior to AFP in terms of the healing rate treating the CAF, however, there were no significant differences between the two groups when it came to the recurrence rate, the wound infection rate, and the complication rate. EAFR might be one initial treatment for the complex cryptoglandular anal fistulas compared with AFP.
Topics: Humans; alpha-Fetoproteins; Rectal Fistula; Treatment Outcome; Surgical Flaps; Fecal Incontinence; Wound Infection; Anal Canal
PubMed: 37882975
DOI: 10.1007/s13304-023-01674-6 -
Radiation Oncology (London, England) Jan 2014Anal canal carcinoma is a rare gastro-intestinal cancer. Radiochemotherapy is the recommended primary treatment for patients with non-metastatic carcinoma; surgery is... (Review)
Review
Anal canal carcinoma is a rare gastro-intestinal cancer. Radiochemotherapy is the recommended primary treatment for patients with non-metastatic carcinoma; surgery is generally reserved for persistent or recurrent disease. Follow-up and surveillance after primary treatment is paramount to classify patients in those with complete remission, persistent or progressive disease. Locally persistent disease represents a clinically significant problem and its management remains subject of some controversy.The aim of this systematic review is to summarise recommendations for the primary treatment of anal canal carcinoma, to focus on the optimal time to consider residual disease as genuine persistence to proceed with salvage treatment, and to discern how this analysis might inform future clinical trials in management in this class of patients.
Topics: Anus Neoplasms; Combined Modality Therapy; Humans; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Neoplasm, Residual; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Radiotherapy; Salvage Therapy; Treatment Failure
PubMed: 24472223
DOI: 10.1186/1748-717X-9-39 -
Ecancermedicalscience 2016The standard treatment for localised squamous cell carcinoma of the anal canal (SCCAC) is chemoradiotherapy (CRT) with infusional 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and mitomycin....
BACKGROUND
The standard treatment for localised squamous cell carcinoma of the anal canal (SCCAC) is chemoradiotherapy (CRT) with infusional 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and mitomycin. Because 5-FU and capecitabine have offered similar efficacy in many phase-III trials of solid tumours, studies have tested capecitabine in this setting of SCCAC. However, these studies are small and have reported variable results. Therefore, a systematic review and meta-analysis was performed.
METHODS
Medline, Scopus and Embase were searched for studies that evaluated the efficacy outcomes of capecitabine used as a substitute of 5-FU in the CRT of localised SCCAC. The primary endpoint was complete response rate (CRR) at 6 months. Metaprop analysis of reported CRR-based on pooled estimates of proportions with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) were calculated on the base of the Freeman-Tukey double arcsine transformation.
RESULTS
We retrieved 300 studies, of which six met our eligibility criteria. The capecitabine dose ranged from 500 mg/m to 825 mg/m BID for 5 days per week during radiation. With a total of 218 patients, the median follow-up was 21.5 months (14-23). The pooled analysis of three trials ( = 132 patients) reported a CRR at 6 months of 88% (83%-94%), considering all clinical stages. The pooled analysis of overall CRR ( = 218 patients), evaluated at different intervals, showed an overall CRR of 91% (87%-95%). Rates of locoregional relapse varied from 3.2% to 21%. The majority of patients completed the planned radiotherapy dose (93.5%-100%) and any chemotherapy interruption was reported in up to 55.8% of patients.
CONCLUSIONS
Capecitabine is an acceptable and more convenient alternative to infusional 5-FU in the CRT for localised SCCAC, offering similar clinical CRR to those reported by phase-III trials.
PubMed: 28105070
DOI: 10.3332/ecancer.2016.699 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2014One to eight per cent of women suffer third-degree perineal tear (anal sphincter injury) and fourth-degree perineal tear (rectal mucosa injury) during vaginal birth, and... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
One to eight per cent of women suffer third-degree perineal tear (anal sphincter injury) and fourth-degree perineal tear (rectal mucosa injury) during vaginal birth, and these tears are more common after forceps delivery (28%) and midline episiotomies. Third- and fourth-degree tears can become contaminated with bacteria from the rectum and this significantly increases in the chance of perineal wound infection. Prophylactic antibiotics might have a role in preventing this infection.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness of antibiotic prophylaxis for reducing maternal morbidity and side effects in third- and fourth-degree perineal tear during vaginal birth.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 August 2014) and the reference lists of retrieved articles.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials comparing outcomes of prophylactic antibiotics versus placebo or no antibiotics in third- and fourth-degree perineal tear during vaginal birth.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed the trial reports for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified and included one trial (147 women from a pre-planned sample size of 310 women) that compared the effect of prophylactic antibiotic (single-dose, second-generation cephalosporin - cefotetan or cefoxitin, 1 g intravenously) on postpartum perineal wound complications in third- or fourth-degree perineal tears compared with placebo. Perineal wound complications (wound disruption and purulent discharge) at the two-week postpartum check up were 8.20% and 24.10% in the treatment and the control groups respectively (risk ratio (RR) 0.34, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.12 to 0.96). However, the high failed-appointment rate may limit the generalisability of the results. The overall risk of bias was low except for incomplete outcome data. The quality of the evidence using GRADE was moderate for infection rate at two weeks' postpartum, and low for infection rate at six weeks' postpartum.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Although the data suggest that prophylactic antibiotics help to prevent perineal wound complications following third- or fourth-degree perineal tear, loss to follow-up was very high. The results should be interpreted with caution as they are based on one small trial.
Topics: Anal Canal; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Antibiotic Prophylaxis; Cefotetan; Cefoxitin; Cephalosporins; Delivery, Obstetric; Female; Humans; Intestinal Mucosa; Perineum; Pregnancy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rectum; Rupture; Wound Infection
PubMed: 25289960
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005125.pub4 -
International Journal of Surgery... Mar 2023
Meta-Analysis
Botulinum toxin as a promising surgical strategy for chronic anal fissure: do the dose and injection site matter? Comparison of doses and injection sites of botulinum toxin for chronic anal fissure: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Topics: Humans; Fissure in Ano; Network Meta-Analysis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Botulinum Toxins, Type A; Anal Canal; Chronic Disease; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 36906767
DOI: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000000022 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2011Reports of direct comparisons between operative techniques for anal fissure are variable in their results. These reports are either subject to selection bias (in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Reports of direct comparisons between operative techniques for anal fissure are variable in their results. These reports are either subject to selection bias (in non-randomized studies) or observer bias (in all studies) or have inadequate numbers of patients enrolled to answer the question of efficacy.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the best technique for fissure surgery.
SEARCH METHODS
The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and MEDLINE (1965-2011), Medline (Pubmed) and Embase were searched March to 2011. The list of cited references in all included reports and several study authors also were helpful in finding additional comparative studies.A total of four new trials were included in this update of the review.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All reports in which there was a direct comparison between at least two operative techniques were reviewed and when more than one report existed for any given pair, that report was included. All studies must also be randomised. If crude data were not presented in the report, the authors were contacted and crude data obtained.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
The two most commonly used end points in all reported studies were treatment failure and post-operative incontinence both to flatus and faeces. These are the only two endpoints included in the meta-analysis.
MAIN RESULTS
Four trials, encompassing 406 patients were included in this update, with now a total of 2056 patients in the review from 27 studies that describe and analyze 13 different operative procedures. These operative techniques used by these studies include closed lateral sphincterotomy, open lateral internal sphincterotomy, anal stretch, balloon dilation, wound closure, perineoplasty, length of sphincterotomy and fissurectomy. Two new procedures in the update, similar to anal stretch were described- sphincterolysis and controlled intermittent anal dilatation. A new comparison was described, comparing the effects of unilateral internal sphincterotomy and bilateral internal sphincterotomy.Manual Anal stretch has a higher risk of fissure persistence than internal sphincterotomy and also a significantly higher risk of minor incontinence than sphincterotomy. The combined analyses of open versus closed partial lateral internal sphincterotomy show little difference between the two procedures both in fissure persistence and risk of incontinence Unilateral internal sphincterotomy was shown to be more likely to result in treatment failure compared to bilateral internal sphincterotomy, but there is no significant difference in the risk of incontinence.Sphincterotomy was less likely to result in treatment failure when compared to fissurectomy, but there was no significant difference when considering post-operative incontinence.When comparing sphincterotomy to sphincterolysis, there was no significant difference between the two procedures both in treatment failure and risk of incontinence; the same is the case when comparing sphincterotomy with controlled anal dilation.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Manual anal stretch should probably be abandoned in the treatment of chronic anal fissure in adults. For those patients requiring surgery for anal fissure, open and closed partial lateral internal sphincterotomy appear to be equally efficacious. More data are needed to assess the effectiveness of posterior internal sphincterotomy, anterior levatorplasty, wound suture or papilla excision. Bilateral internal sphincterotomy shows promise, but needs further research into its efficacy.
Topics: Anal Canal; Catheterization; Fecal Incontinence; Fissure in Ano; Flatulence; Humans; Postoperative Complications; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Failure
PubMed: 22071803
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002199.pub4