Diseases of the Colon & Rectum

, Volume 49, Issue 12, pp 1817–1821

Efficacy of Anal Fistula Plug in Closure of Cryptoglandular Fistulas: Long-Term Follow-Up

  • Bradley J. Champagne
  • Lynn M. O’Connor
  • Martha Ferguson
  • Guy R. Orangio
  • Marion E. Schertzer
  • David N. Armstrong
Original Contributions
  • 104 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose

The long-term efficacy of Surgisis® anal fistula plug in closure of cryptoglandular anorectal fistulas was studied.

Methods

Patients with high cryptoglandular anorectal fistulas were prospectively studied. Additional variables recorded were: number of fistula tracts, and presence of setons. Under general anesthesia and in prone jackknife position, patients underwent irrigation of the fistula tract by using hydrogen peroxide. Each primary opening was occluded by using a Surgisis® anal fistula plug, which was securely sutured in place at the primary opening and tacked to the periphery of the secondary opening.

Results

Forty-six patients were prospectively enrolled during a two-year period. Follow-up was six months to two years (median, 12 months). At final follow-up, all fistula tracts had been successfully closed in 38 patients, for an overall success rate of 83 percent. Seven patients had multiple tracts, for a total of 55 fistula tracts in the series. Of the 55 individual tracts, 47 (85 percent) were closed at final follow-up. Patients with one primary opening were most likely to have successful closure by using the anal fistula plug, although this was not significant. Successful closure was not correlated with the presence of setons.

Conclusions

Long-term closure of cryptoglandular anorectal fistula tracts using Surgisis® anal fistula plug is safe and successful in 83 percent of patients and 85 percent of tracts.

Key words

Fistula-in-ano Fistulotomy Fibrin glue Surgisis® anal fistula plug 

References

  1. 1.
    Johnson, E, Gaw, JU, Armstrong, DN 2006Efficacy of anal fistula plug vs. fibrin glue in closure of anorectal fistulaDis Colon Rectum49371376PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Buchanan, GN, Bartram, CI, Phillips, RK,  et al. 2003Efficacy of fibrin sealant in the management of complex anal fistulasDis Colon Rectum4611671174PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sentovic, SM 2003Fibrin glue for anal fistulasDis Colon Rectum46498502CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lindsey, I, Smilgin-Humphreys, MM, Cunningham, C, Mortensen, NJ, George, B 2002A randomized, controlled trial of fibrin glue vs. conventional treatment for anal fistulaDis Colon Rectum4516081615PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Singer, M, Cintron, J, Nelson, R,  et al. 2005Treatment of fistulas-in-ano with fibrin sealant in combination with intra-adhesive antibiotics and/or closure of the internal fistula openingDis Colon Rectum48799808PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cintron, J, Park, JJ, Orsay, CP,  et al. 2000Repair of fistulas-in-ano using fibrin adhesive: long-term follow-upDis Colon Rectum43944949PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Badylak, SF 2002The extra cellular matrix as a scaffold for tissue reconstructionSemin Cell Dev Biol13377383PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Badylak, SF 1993

    Small intestinal submucosa (SIS): a biomaterial conducive to smart tissue remodeling

    Bell, E eds. Tissue engineering: current perspectivesBurkhauser PublishersCambridge179189
    Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Garcia-Aguilar, J, Davey, CS, Le, CT, Lowry, AC, Rothenberger, DA 2000Patient satisfaction after surgical treatment for fistula-in-anoDis Colon Rectum4312061212PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zimmermann, DD, Briel, JW, Gosselink, MP, Schouten, WR 2001Anocutaneous advancement flap repair of transsphincteric fistulasDis Colon Rectum4414741480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sonoda, T, Hull, T, Piedmonte, MR, Fazio, VW 2002Outcomes of primary repair of anorectal and rectovaginal fistulas using endorectal advancement flapDis Colon Rectum4516221628PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Schouten, WR, Zimmermann, DD, Briel, JW 1999Transanal advancement flap repair of transsphincteric fistulaDis Colon Rectum4214191423PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mizrahi, NM, Wexner, SD, Zmora, O 2002Endorectal advancement flap. Are there predictors of failure?Dis Colon Rectum4516161621PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Tsang, CB, Madoff, RD, Wong, WD,  et al. 1998Anal sphincter integrity and function influences outcome in rectovaginal fistula repairDis Colon Rectum4111411146PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Schouten, WR, Zimmermann, DD, Briel, HD 1999Transanal advancement flap repair of transsphincteric fistulasDis Colon Rectum4214191423PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ueno, T, Pickett, LC, Feunte, SG, Lawson, DC, Pappas, TN 2004Clinical applications of porcine small intestinal submucosa in the management of infected or potentially contaminated abdominal defectsJ Gastrointest Surg8109112PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Franklin, ME, Gonzalez, JJ, Glass, JL 2004Use of porcine small intestinal submucosa as a prosthetic device for laparoscopic repair of hernias in contaminated fields: 2 year follow-upHernia8186189PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Helton, WS, Fisichella, PM, Berger, R,  et al. 2005Short-term outcomes with small intestinal submucosa for ventral abdominal herniaArch Surg140549562PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bradley J. Champagne
    • 1
  • Lynn M. O’Connor
    • 1
  • Martha Ferguson
    • 1
  • Guy R. Orangio
    • 1
  • Marion E. Schertzer
    • 1
  • David N. Armstrong
    • 1
  1. 1.Georgia Colon & Rectal Surgical ClinicAtlantaGeorgiaUSA

Personalised recommendations