Advertisement

Techniques in Coloproctology

, Volume 20, Issue 8, pp 585–590 | Cite as

Results of the Gore Bio-A fistula plug implantation in the treatment of anal fistula: a multicentre study

  • A. Herold
  • A. Ommer
  • A. Fürst
  • F. Pakravan
  • D. Hahnloser
  • B. Strittmatter
  • T. Schiedeck
  • F. Hetzer
  • F. Aigner
  • E. Berg
  • M. Roblick
  • D. Bussen
  • A. Joos
  • S. VershenyaEmail author
Original Article

Abstract

Background

The aim of this prospective study was to determine the efficiency of the Gore Bio-A synthetic plug in the treatment of anal fistulas.

Methods

A synthetic bioabsorbable anal fistula plug was implanted in 60 patients. All fistulas were transsphincteric and cryptoglandular in origin.

Results

The healing rate after 1 year of follow-up was 52 % (31 out of 60 patients). No patient was lost to follow-up. The treatment had no effect on the incontinence score. The plug dislodgement rate was 10 % (6 out of 60 patients). Thirty-four per cent of the patients (16 out of 47) required reoperation. The average operating time was 32 ± 10.2 min, and the average length of hospital stay was 3.3 ± 1.8 days.

Conclusions

Synthetic plugs may be an alternative to bioprosthetic fistula plugs in the treatment of transsphincteric anal fistulas. This method might have better success rates than treatment with bioprosthetic fistula plugs.

Keywords

Anal fistula Anal fistula plug Bioabsorbable plug 

Notes

Acknowledgments

All plugs were supplied by W.L. Gore Corporation. We wish to acknowledge all participating centres: End- und Dickdarm-Zentrum Hannover, Germany; Caritas Krankenhaus St. Josef Regensburg, Germany; Klinik für Viszeralchirurgie, Universitäts-Spital, Zürich, Switzerland; Coloproktologisches Zentrum Düsseldorf, Germany; Klinik für Viszeralchirurgie, Klinikum Ludwigsburg, Germany; Praxisklinik 2000 Freiburg, Germany; Prosper Hospital Recklinghausen, Germany; Chirurgische Klinik Universität Innsbruck, Austria; Klinik für Chirugie, Kliniken Essen-Mitte, Germany End- und Dickdarmzentrum Mannheim, Germany and Klinik für Chirurgie, Kantonsspital, Schaffhausen, Switzerland.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

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.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all participants included in the study.

References

  1. 1.
    Sainio P (1984) Fistula-in-ano in a defined population. Incidence and epidemiological aspects. Ann Chir Gynaecol 73:219–224PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cariati A (2013) Fistulotomy or seton in anal fistula: a decisional algorithm. Updates Surg 65:201–205CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    van der Hagen SJ, Baeten CG, Soeters PB, van Gemert WG (2006) Long-term outcome following mucosal advancement flap for high perianal fistulas and fistulotomy for low perianal fistulas: recurrent perianal fistulas: failure of treatment or recurrent patient disease? Int J Colorectal Dis 21:784–790CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    van Koperen PJ, Bemelman WA, Bossuyt PM et al (2008) The anal fistula plug versus the mucosal advancement flap for the treatment of anorectal fistula (PLUG trial). BMC Surg 8:11CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ortiz H, Marzo J (2000) Endorectal flap advancement repair and fistulectomy for high trans-sphincteric and suprasphincteric fistulas. Br J Surg 87:1680–1683CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Adamina M, Ross T, Guenin MO et al (2014) Anal fistula plug: a prospective evaluation of success, continence and quality of life in the treatment of complex fistulae. Colorectal Dis 16:547–554CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Blom J, Husberg-Sellberg B, Lindelius A et al (2014) Results of collagen plug occlusion of anal fistula: a multicentre study of 126 patients. Colorectal Dis 16:626–630CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chan S, McCullough J, Schizas A et al (2012) Initial experience of treating anal fistula with the Surgisis anal fistula plug. Tech Coloproctol 16:201–206CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Christoforidis D, Etzioni DA, Goldberg SM, Madoff RD, Mellgren A (2008) Treatment of complex anal fistulas with the collagen fistula plug. Dis Colon Rectum 51:1482–1487CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cintron JR, Abcarian H, Chaudhry V et al (2013) Treatment of fistula-in-ano using a porcine small intestinal submucosa anal fistula plug. Tech Coloproctol 17:187–191CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ellis CN (2007) Bioprosthetic plugs for complex anal fistulas: an early experience. J Surg Educ 64:36–40CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ky AJ, Sylla P, Steinhagen R, Steinhagen E, Khaitov S, Ly EK (2008) Collagen fistula plug for the treatment of anal fistulas. Dis Colon Rectum 51:838–843CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lawes DA, Efron JE, Abbas M, Heppell J, Young-Fadok TM (2008) Early experience with the bioabsorbable anal fistula plug. World J Surg 32:1157–1159CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    O’Connor L, Champagne BJ, Ferguson MA, Orangio GR, Schertzer ME, Armstrong DN (2006) Efficacy of anal fistula plug in closure of Crohn’s anorectal fistulas. Dis Colon Rectum 49:1569–1573CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ortiz H, Marzo J, Ciga MA, Oteiza F, Armendariz P, de Miguel M (2009) Randomized clinical trial of anal fistula plug versus endorectal advancement flap for the treatment of high cryptoglandular fistula in ano. Br J Surg 96:608–612CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    van Koperen PJ, Bemelman WA, Gerhards MF et al (2011) The anal fistula plug treatment compared with the mucosal advancement flap for cryptoglandular high transsphincteric perianal fistula: a double-blinded multicenter randomized trial. Dis Colon Rectum 54:387–393CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fisher OM, Raptis DA, Vetter D et al (2015) An outcome and cost analysis of anal fistula plug insertion vs endorectal advancement flap for complex anal fistulae. Colorectal Dis 17:619–626CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Buchberg B, Masoomi H, Choi J, Bergman H, Mills S, Stamos MJ (2010) A tale of two (anal fistula) plugs: Is there a difference in short-term outcomes? Am Surg 76:1150–1153PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Stamos MJ, Snyder M, Robb BW et al (2015) Prospective multicenter study of a synthetic bioabsorbable anal fistula plug to treat cryptoglandular transsphincteric anal fistulas. Dis Colon Rectum 58:344–351CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    de la Portilla F (2013) Gore Bio-A((R)) fistula plug for complex anal fistula: the results should be interpreted cautiously. Colorectal Dis 15:628–629CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Favreau-Weltzer C, Bouchard D, Eleouet-Kaplan M, Pigot F (2012) Response to Ratto et al., ‘new Gore Bio-A((R)) plug for anal fistula’. Colorectal Dis 14:1152–1153CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ratto C, Litta F, Parello A, Donisi L, Zaccone G, De Simone V (2012) Gore Bio-A(R) fistula plug: a new sphincter-sparing procedure for complex anal fistula. Colorectal Dis 14:e264–e269CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ommer A, Herold A, Joos A, Schmidt C, Weyand G, Bussen D (2012) Gore BioA fistula plug in the treatment of high anal fistulas–initial results from a German multicenter-study. Ger Med Sci 10:Doc13Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Italia Srl 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. Herold
    • 1
  • A. Ommer
    • 2
  • A. Fürst
    • 3
  • F. Pakravan
    • 4
  • D. Hahnloser
    • 5
  • B. Strittmatter
    • 6
  • T. Schiedeck
    • 7
  • F. Hetzer
    • 8
  • F. Aigner
    • 9
  • E. Berg
    • 10
  • M. Roblick
    • 11
  • D. Bussen
    • 1
  • A. Joos
    • 1
  • S. Vershenya
    • 12
    Email author
  1. 1.End- und DickdarmzentrumMannheimGermany
  2. 2.Klinik für Chirugie, Kliniken Essen-MitteEssenGermany
  3. 3.Caritas KrankenhausRegensburgGermany
  4. 4.Coloproktologisches Zentrum DüsseldorfDüsseldorfGermany
  5. 5.Klinik für Viszeralchirurgie, Universitäts-SpitalZurichSwitzerland
  6. 6.Praxisklinik 2000FreiburgGermany
  7. 7.Klinik für Viszeralchirurgie, Klinikum LudwigsburgLudwigsburgGermany
  8. 8.Klinik für Chirurgie, KantonsspitalSchaffhausenSwitzerland
  9. 9.Chirurgische Klinik Universität InnsbruckInnsbruckAustria
  10. 10.Prosper HospitalRecklinghausenGermany
  11. 11.End- und Dickdarmzenrtum HannoverHannoverGermany
  12. 12.Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre MannheimMedical Faculty Mannheim of the University of HeidelbergMannheimGermany

Personalised recommendations