Hydropneumatic anal dilation in conservative treatment of chronic anal fissure: clinical outcomes and randomized comparison with topical nitroglycerin

Long-term Efficacy and Safety of Controlled Manual Anal Dilatation in the Treatment of Chronic Anal Fissures: A Single-center Observational Study

Objectives

Conventional anal dilatation for anal fissures has long been abandoned because of the high incidence of anal incontinence. However, less invasive and more precise dilation techniques have been developed that have shown high healing and low incontinence rates. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of controlled anal dilatation (CAD) using a standardized maximum anal diameter.

Methods

This study included 523 patients who underwent CAD for chronic anal fissures between January 2010 and December 2014. CAD was performed under sacral epidural anesthesia. The index fingers of both hands were placed in the anus and dilated evenly in various directions. CAD was completed when the anus was dilated to the sixth scale (35 mm in diameter) using a caliber ruler.

Results

The mean anal scale size expanded from 3.1 to 5.8 (p<0.001). Non-healing was observed in nine patients (1.7%) at 1 month postoperatively, six of whom underwent additional CAD. The mean maximal anal resting pressure (mmHg) decreased from 90.2 to 79.7 at three months postoperatively (p<0.001). Postoperative complications were observed in 11 (2.1%) patients, of whom three patients with thrombosed hemorrhoids underwent resection. None of the patients complained of anal incontinence during the mean follow-up period of 16.6 months. The cumulative recurrence-free rates at three and five years were 87.9% and 69.2%, respectively.

Conclusions

CAD is technically simple and safe and can achieve reasonable long-term outcomes. Thus, CAD appears to be the preferred procedure for patients with chronic anal fissures who do not respond to conservative treatments.

The Italian Unitary Society of Colon-proctology (SIUCP: Società Italiana Unitaria di Colonproctologia) guidelines for the management of anal fissure

INTRODUCTION

The aim of these evidence-based guidelines is to present a consensus position from members of the Italian Unitary Society of Colon-Proctology (SIUCP: Società Italiana Unitaria di Colon-Proctologia) on the diagnosis and management of anal fissure, with the purpose to guide every physician in the choice of the best treatment option, according with the available literature.

METHODS

A panel of experts was designed and charged by the Board of the SIUCP to develop key-questions on the main topics covering the management of anal fissure and to performe an accurate search on each topic in different databanks, in order to provide evidence-based answers to the questions and to summarize them in statements. All the clinical questions were discussed by the expert panel in different rounds through the Delphi approach and, for each statement, a consensus among the experts was reached. The questions were created according to the PICO criteria, and the statements developed adopting the GRADE methodology.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with acute anal fissure the medical therapy with dietary and behavioral norms is indicated. In the chronic phase of disease, the conservative treatment with topical 0.3% nifedipine plus 1.5% lidocaine or nitrates may represent the first-line therapy, eventually associated with ointments with film-forming, anti-inflammatory and healing properties such as Propionibacterium extract gel. In case of first-line treatment failure, the surgical strategy (internal sphincterotomy or fissurectomy with flap), may be guided by the clinical findings, eventually supported by endoanal ultrasound and anal manometry.

A systematic review and network meta-analysis comparing treatments for anal fissure

BACKGROUND

There are multiple treatments for anal fissures. These range from medical treatment to surgical procedures, such as sphincterotomy. The aim of this study was to compare the relative clinical outcomes and effectiveness of interventional treatments for anal fissure.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials were identified by means of a PRISMA-compliant systematic review using the Medline, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases. Inclusion criteria were randomized controlled trials comparing treatments for anal fissure. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed using BUGSnet package in R. Outcomes of interest were healing (6-8-, 10-16-, and >16-week follow-up), symptom recurrence, pain (measured on a visual analog scale), and fecal or flatus incontinence. PROPSERO Registration: CRD42021229615.

RESULTS

Sixty-nine randomized controlled trials were included in the analysis. Lateral sphincterotomy remains the treatment with the highest odds of healing compared to botulinum toxin and medical therapy at all follow-up time points. There was no significant difference in healing between botulinum toxin and medical therapy at any time point. Advancement flap showed similar effectiveness compared to lateral sphincterotomy. Medical treatment and botulinum toxin had the highest pain scores at follow-up. Sphincterotomy had the highest odds of fecal and flatus incontinence.

CONCLUSION

Lateral sphincterotomy had the highest rates of healing and should be considered as the definitive treatment after failed initial therapy with botulinum toxin or medical treatment. Botulinum toxin was equally effective compared to medical treatment. Advancement flap shows similar effectiveness compared to lateral sphincterotomy, but more studies are needed to evaluate its efficacy.

Anorectal emergencies: WSES-AAST guidelines

Anorectal emergencies comprise a wide variety of diseases that share common symptoms, i.e., anorectal pain or bleeding and might require immediate management. While most of the underlying conditions do not need inpatient management, some of them could be life-threatening and need prompt recognition and treatment. It is well known that an incorrect diagnosis is frequent for anorectal diseases and that a delayed diagnosis is related to an impaired outcome. This paper aims to improve the knowledge and the awareness on this specific topic and to provide a useful tool for every physician dealing with anorectal emergencies.The present guidelines have been developed according to the GRADE methodology. To create these guidelines, a panel of experts was designed and charged by the boards of the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) and American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST) to perform a systematic review of the available literature and to provide evidence-based statements with immediate practical application. All the statements were presented and discussed during the WSES-AAST-WJES Consensus Conference on Anorectal Emergencies, and for each statement, a consensus among the WSES-AAST panel of experts was reached. We structured our work into seven main topics to cover the entire management of patients with anorectal emergencies and to provide an up-to-date, easy-to-use tool that can help physicians and surgeons during the decision-making process.

S3-Leitlinie: Analfissur

Die Analfissur ist eine der häufigsten Pathologien, welche sich dem Proktologen präsentiert. Entsprechend ist es wichtig, verlässliche Leitlinien dazu zu entwickeln. Die aktuelle Leitlinie wurde anhand eines systematischen Literaturreview von einem interdisziplinären Expertengremium diskutiert und verabschiedet.

Die akute Analfissur, soll auf Grund ihrer hohen Selbstheilungstendenz konservativ behandelt werden. Die Heilung wird am besten durch die Einnahme von Ballaststoff reicher Ernährung und einer medikamentösen Relaxation durch Kalziumkanal-Antagonisten (CCA) unterstützt. Zur Behandlung der chronischen Analfissur (CAF), soll den Patienten eine medikamentöse Behandlung zur „chemischen Sphinkterotomie“ mittels topischer CCA oder Nitraten angeboten werden. Bei Versagen dieser Therapie, kann zur Relaxation des inneren Analsphinkters Botulinumtoxin injiziert werden. Es ist belegt, dass die operativen Therapien effektiver sind. Deshalb kann eine Operation schon als primäre Therapie oder nach erfolgloser medikamentöser Therapie erfolgen. Die Fissurektomie, evtl. mit zusätzlicher Botulinumtoxin Injektion oder Lappendeckung, ist die Operation der Wahl. Obwohl die laterale Internus Sphinkterotomie die CAF effektiver heilt, bleibt diese wegen dem höheren Risiko für eine postoperative Stuhlinkontinenz eine Option für Einzelfälle.

The Long-term Effect of Standardized Anal Dilatation for Chronic Anal Fissure on Anal Continence

PURPOSE

For the past several decades, internal anal sphincterotomy has generally been considered to be the standard operation for an anal fissure. However, wound complications inherent in this operation forced surgeons to look for an alternative form of treatment. The aim of our study was to evaluate the long-term outcome of anal dilatation for chronic anal fissure, especially possible negative impact on anal sphincter function.

METHODS

The study was approved by the local Institutional Review Board and given a waiver of written consent. A phone call survey was undertaken among a group of consecutive patients who had an anal dilatation by standardized technique for chronic anal fissure for the period between 2000 and 2016. The survey included medical, obstetrical and surgical-related data, Wexner fecal incontinence score, recurrence of the anal fissure, and the need for additional medical intervention. Five hundred 48 patients were identified after limitations of age, concomitant pathology, and procedures that were applied to the hospital computerized database. Eighty-five patients (group A) agreed to participate in the survey and 463 patients did not.

RESULTS

There were no differences between groups in demographic information and medical records data; therefore, group A may well represent a satisfactory sample of the whole group. The interval between the procedure and the survey was 6.8 ± 2.7 years. The Wexner incontinence score was 0 in 94% of patients.

CONCLUSION

Anal dilatation, performed in a systematic and standardized way, has a successful outcome with no complications and has no clear long-term negative impact on anal sphincter function.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the treatment of anal fissure

BACKGROUND

Anal fissure has a very large number of treatment options. The choice is difficult. In an effort to assist in that, choice presented here is a systematic review and meta-analysis of all published treatments for anal fissure that have been studied in randomized controlled trials.

METHODS

Randomized trials were sought in the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, Medline, EMBASE and the trials registry sites clinicaltrials.gov and who/int/ictrp/search/en. Abstracts were screened, full-text studies chosen, and finally eligible studies selected and abstracted. The review was then divided into those studies that compared two or more surgical procedures and those that had at least one arm that was non-surgical. Studies were further categorized by the specific interventions and comparisons. The outcome assessed was treatment failure. Negative effects of treatment assessed were headache and anal incontinence. Risk of bias was assessed for each study, and the strength of the evidence of each comparison was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach.

RESULTS

One hundred and forty-eight eligible trials were found and assessed, 31 in the surgical group and 117 in the non-surgical group. There were 14 different operations described in the surgical group and 29 different non-surgical treatments in the non-surgical group along with partial lateral internal sphincterotomy (LIS). There were 61 different comparisons. Of these, 47 were reported in 2 or fewer studies, usually with quite small patient samples. The largest single comparison was glyceryl trinitrate (GTN) versus control with 19 studies. GTN was more effective than control in sustained cure (OR 0.68; 95% CI 0.63-0.77), but the quality of evidence was very poor because of severe heterogeneity, and risk of bias due to inadequate clinical follow-up. The only comparison to have a GRADE quality of evidence of high was a subgroup analysis of LIS versus any medical therapy (OR 0.12; CI 0.07-0.21). Most of the other studies were downgraded in GRADE due to imprecision.

CONCLUSIONS

LIS is superior to non-surgical therapies in achieving sustained cure of fissure. Calcium channel blockers were more effective than GTN and with less risk of headache, but with only a low quality of evidence. Anal incontinence, once thought to be a frequent risk with LIS, was found in various subgroups in this review to have a risk between 3.4 and 4.4%. Among the surgical studies, manual anal stretch performed worse than LIS in the treatment of chronic anal fissure in adults. For those patients requiring surgery for anal fissure, open LIS and closed LIS appear to be equally efficacious, with a moderate GRADE quality of evidence. All other GRADE evaluations of procedures were low to very low due mostly to imprecision.

Operative and medical treatment of chronic anal fissures-a review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Anal fissures are a common problem and have a cumulative lifetime incidence of 11%. Previous reviews on anal fissures show inconsistent results regarding post-interventional healing and incontinence rates. In this review our aim was to compare the treatments for chronic anal fissures by incorporating indirect comparisons using network meta-analysis. The PubMed database was searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published between 1975 and 2015. The primary outcome measures were healing and incontinence rates after lateral internal sphincterotomy (LIS), anal dilatation (DILA), anoplasty and/or fissurectomy (FIAP), botulinum toxin (BT) and noninvasive treatment (NIT). Random effects network meta-analyses were complemented by fixed effects and Bayesian models. The present analysis included 44 RCTs and 3268 patients. After a median follow-up of 2 months, the healing rates for LIS, DILA, FIAP, BT and NIT were 93.1, 84.4, 79.8, 62.6, and 58.6% and the incontinence rates were 9.4, 18.2, 4.9, 4.1, and 3.0%, respectively. Compared with NIT, the odds ratio (OR) [95% confidence interval (CI)] for healing after LIS, DILA, FIAP and BT was 9.9 (5.4-18.1), 8.6 (3.1-24.0), 3.5 (1.0-12.7) and 1.9 (1.1-3.5), respectively, on network meta-analysis. The OR (95% CI) for incontinence after LIS, DILA, FIAP and BT was 6.8 (3.1-15.1), 16.9 (6.0-47.8), 3.9 (1.0-15.1) and 1.6 (0.7-3.7), respectively. Ranking of treatments, fixed effects and Bayesian models confirmed these findings. In conclusion, based on our meta-analysis LIS is the most efficacious treatment but is compromised by a high rate of postoperative incontinence. Given the trade-offs between the risks and benefits, FIAP and BT might be good alternatives for the treatment of chronic anal fissures.

Non surgical therapy for anal fissure

BACKGROUND

Because of the disability associated with surgery for anal fissure and the risk of incontinence, medical alternatives for surgery have been sought. Most recently, pharmacologic methods that relax the anal smooth muscle, to accomplish reversibly what occurs in surgery, have been used to obtain fissure healing.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and morbidity of various medical therapies for anal fissure.

SEARCH METHODS

Search terms include "anal fissure randomized". Timing from 1966 to August 2010. Further details of the search below.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies in which participants were randomized to a non-surgical therapy for anal fissure. Comparison groups may include an operative procedure, an alternate medical therapy or placebo. Chronic fissure, acute fissure and fissure in children are included in the review. Atypical fissures associated with inflammatory bowel disease or cancer or anal infection are excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were abstracted from published reports and meeting abstracts, assessing method of randomization, blinding, "intention to treat" and drop-outs, therapies, supportive measures (applied to both groups), dosing and frequency and cross-overs. Dichotomous outcome measures included Non-healing of the fissure (a combination of persistence and recurrence), and Adverse events (including incontinence, headache, infection, anaphylaxis). Continuous outcome measures included measures of pain relief and anorectal manometry.

MAIN RESULTS

In this update 23 studies including 1236 participants is added to the 54 studies and 3904 participants in the 2008 publication, however 2 studies were from the last version reclassified as un included, so the final number of participants is 5031.49 different comparisons of the ability of medical therapies to heal anal fissure have been reported in 75 RCTs. Seventeen agents were used (nitroglycerin ointment (GTN), isosorbide mono & dinitrate, Botulinum toxin (Botox), diltiazem, nifedipine (Calcium channel blockers or CCBs), hydrocortisone, lignocaine, bran, minoxidil, indoramin, clove oil, L-arginine, sitz baths, sildenafil, "healer cream" and placebo) as well as Sitz baths, anal dilators and surgical sphincterotomy. GTN was found to be marginally but significantly better than placebo in healing anal fissure (48.9% vs. 35.5%, p < 0.0009), but late recurrence of fissure was common, in the range of 50% of those initially cured. Botox and CCBs were equivalent to GTN in efficacy with fewer adverse events. No medical therapy came close to the efficacy of surgical sphincterotomy, though none of the medical therapies in these RCTs were associated with the risk of incontinence.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Medical therapy for chronic anal fissure, currently consisting of topical glyceryl trinitrate, botulinum toxin injection or the topical calcium channel blockers nifedipine or diltiazem in acute and chronic fissure and fissure in children may be applied with a chance of cure that is marginally better than placebo. For chronic fissure in adults all medical therapies are far less effective than surgery. A few of the newer agents investigated show promise based only upon single studies (clove oil, sildenifil and a "healer cream") but lack comparison to more established medications.

Comparison of controlled-intermittent anal dilatation and lateral internal sphincterotomy in the treatment of chronic anal fissures: a prospective, randomized study

AIM

The results of controlled-intermittent anal dilatation (CIAD) or lateral internal sphincterotomy (LIS) in the treatment of chronic anal fissures are presented.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Forty patients who were randomized to two groups underwent CIAD or a LIS. The pre- and post-operative mean anal canal resting pressures (MACRPs) and symptoms were recorded and the results were compared.

RESULTS

Two months post-operatively, 18 patients in the CIAD group and 17 patients in the LIS group had healed completely, and had no anal incontinence or other complications. The post-operative improvement in pain, bleeding, and constipation did not differ significantly between the two groups. In the CIAD and LIS groups, the pre-operative MACRPs were 89.7+/-16.5 and 87.6+/-12.3 mmHg, respectively; 2 months post-operatively, the MACRPs had significantly decreased to 76.9+/-13.7 and 78.1+/-11.3 mmHg in the CIAD and LIS groups, respectively. No statistical difference existed in the pre- or post-treatment MACRPs between the groups.

CONCLUSION

CIAD applied with a standardized technique reduced anal canal resting pressure and provided symptomatic healing that was equivalent to a LIS. Since there were no findings of incontinence, or situations which resulted in sphincter damage, we conclude that CIAD is suitable for patients with chronic anal fissures because it is less invasive than LIS, with equivalent efficacy and safety. In addition, the CIAD method may be an alternative procedure in older and multiparous women who has a higher risk of incontinence.

A review of chronic anal fissure management

Anal fissure management has rapidly progressed in the last 15 years as our understanding of fissure pathophysiology has developed. All methods of treatment aim to reduce the anal sphincter spasm associated with chronic anal fissures. Surgical techniques have been used for over 100 years with success. Lateral internal sphincterotomy remains the surgical treatment of choice for many practitioners. Postoperative impairment of continence remains controversial. Recently, less invasive methods of treatment have been explored. Topical nitrates, calcium channel blockers and botulinum toxin are established treatments. These and other non-surgical treatments are described in this review. Various guidelines and treatment algorithms for anal fissure are also discussed.

Current concepts in anal fissures

INTRODUCTION

Anal fissure is a common and distressing problem the true incidence of which is probably higher than recorded. There is a progressive understanding of the etiopathogenesis of this entity and the changing trend in its management approach. This is a systematic review of available published literature looking at current management options in anal fissures.

METHODS

A MEDLINE-based search of the relevant literature from 1970 to 2004 was performed on the current concepts in etiopathogenesis and management of anal fissure.

RESULTS

The current opinion is a drift toward conservative measures as the first- and second-line approaches rather than surgery for treatment of anal fissure. Simple and readily available measures with less complication, good patient compliance, and satisfaction requiring no hospitalization should first be considered.

CONCLUSIONS

Most anal fissures heal with medical therapy, but their limitations include side effects, poor compliance, and recurrence of the fissure. A cautious surgical approach is required to treat those who do not respond to medical therapy.

Non surgical therapy for anal fissure

BACKGROUND

Because of the disability associated with surgery for anal fissure and the risk of incontinence, medical alternatives for surgery have been sought. Most recently, pharmacologic methods that relax the anal smooth muscle, to accomplish reversibly what occurs in surgery, have been used to obtain fissure healing.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and morbidity of various medical therapies for anal fissure.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Search terms include "anal fissure randomized". Timing from 1966 to May 2006. Further details of the search below.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies in which participants were randomized to a non-surgical therapy for anal fissure. Comparison groups may include an operative procedure, an alternate medical therapy or placebo. Chronic fissure, acute fissure and fissure in children are included in the review. Atypical fissures associated with inflammatory bowel disease or cancer or anal infection are excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were abstracted from published reports and meeting abstracts, assessing method of randomization, blinding, "intention to treat" and drop-outs, therapies, supportive measures (applied to both groups), dosing and frequency and cross-overs. Dichotomous outcome measures included Non-healing of the fissure (a combination of persistence and recurrence), and Adverse events (including incontinence, headache, infection, anaphylaxis). Continuous outcome measures included measures of pain relief and anorectal manometry.

MAIN RESULTS

48 different comparisons of the ability of medical therapies to heal anal fissure have been reported in 53 RCTs. Eleven agents were used (nitroglycerin ointment (GTN), isosorbide dinitrate, Botulinum toxin (Botox), diltiazem, nifedipine (Calcium channel blockers or CCBs), hydrocortisone, lignocaine, bran, minoxidil, indoramin, and placebo) as well as anal dilators and surgical sphincterotomy.GTN was found to be marginally but significantly better than placebo in healing anal fissure (48.6% vs. 37%, p < 0.004), but late recurrence of fissure was common, in the range of 50% of those initially cured. Botox and CCBs were equivalent to GTN in efficacy with fewer adverse events. No medical therapy came close to the efficacy of surgical sphincterotomy, though none in these RCTs was associated with the risk of incontinence.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Medical therapy for chronic anal fissure, acute fissure and fissure in children may be applied with a chance of cure that is marginally better than placebo, and, for chronic fissure in adults, far less effective than surgery.

Sphincterolysis: a novel approach towards chronic anal fissure

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The surgical approach in chronic anal fissure is often found associated with disturbed anal continence as well as recurrence. This report describes the author's approach of 'sphincterolysis' or fragmentation of the fibers of the internal sphincter on the left lateral anal wall.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

132 patients with chronic anal fissures were treated with this technique. Pre- and postoperative anal manometry was recorded. The postoperative course and early and 1-year follow-up results were recorded.

RESULTS

Early complications included ecchymosis, hematoma, and pain. Fissure healing and relief of symptoms observed in 97% of patients. A transient, variable degree of incontinence occurred in 23 patients and persistent incontinence to flatus and soiling in 5.

CONCLUSION

Internal anal sphincterolysis is a safe, effective procedure for the treatment of chronic anal fissure.