Comparison of topical nifedipine with oral nifedipine for treatment of anal fissure: a randomized controlled trial

Comparative Evaluation of Effects of Oral Diltiazem and Topical Diltiazem (2%) Ointment in the Treatment of Chronic Anal Fissure: A Prospective Randomized Study

Background

Fissure-in-Ano is a common condition of the anorectal region. Most of the time, it is managed non-surgically. There are various drugs used for the treatment of anal fissures. Calcium channel blockers are one of them that reduce the tone of sphincter muscles. The present study compares the efficacy of oral diltiazem and topical 2% diltiazem ointment in patients with chronic anal fissures.

Methods

Patients were randomized into two groups. Group A (n=25) received treatment in the form of oral diltiazem, while group B (n=25) received treatment in the form of 2% (weight/volume) diltiazem ointment for local application in addition to other conservative methods like sitz bath and stool softeners. Outcomes in the form of success of treatment and complications were assessed. Statistical analysis was done using MedCalc software version 14.0. P value of<0.05 was considered significant.

Results

The mean age of patients was 32.00±10.67 years in group A and 30.64±9.53 years in group B. Pain relief was significantly better in group B than in group A at the end of the first week (P=0.00018), but at the end of 6th week, no significant difference was observed. Fissure healing was more significant in group B than in group A after 6 weeks (P=0.0152).

Conclusion

Local diltiazem ointment is a better option than oral diltiazem for anal fissures with respect to better outcomes and lesser complications.

Belgian consensus guideline on the management of anal fissures

Introduction

Acute and chronic anal fissures are common proctological problems that lead to relatively high morbidity and frequent contacts with health care professionals. Multiple treatment options, both topical and surgical, are available, therefore evidence-based guidance is preferred.

Methods

A Delphi consensus process was used to review the literature and create relevant statements on the treatment of anal fissures. These statements were discussed and modulated until sufficient agreement was reached. These guidelines were based on the published literature up to January 2023.

Results

Anal fissures occur equally in both sexes, mostly between the second and fourth decades of life. Diagnosis can be made based on cardinal symptoms and clinical examination. In case of insufficient relief with conservative treatment options, pharmacological sphincter relaxation is preferred. After 6-8 weeks of topical treatment, surgical options can be explored. Both lateral internal sphincterotomy as well as fissurectomy are well-established surgical techniques, both with specific benefits and risks.

Conclusions

The current guidelines for the management of anal fissures include recommendations for the clinical evaluation of anal fissures, and their conservative, topical and surgical management.

Topical Nifedipine for the Treatment of Pressure Ulcer: A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Effect of nifedipine on pressure ulcer (PU) healing has not been evaluated in the human subjects yet.

STUDY QUESTION

In this study, the effect of topical application of nifedipine 3% ointment on PU healing in critically ill patients was investigated.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical.

MEASURES AND OUTCOMES

In this study, 200 patients with stage I or II PU according to 2-digit Stirling Pressure Ulcer Severity Scale were randomized to receive topical nifedipine 3% ointment or placebo twice daily for 14 days. Changes in the size and stage of the ulcers were considered as primary outcome of the study. The stage of the ulcers at baseline and on day 7 and day 14 of study was determined by using 2-digit stirling scale. In addition, the surface area of the wounds was estimated by multiplying width by length.

RESULTS

In total, 83 patients in each group completed the study. The groups were matched for the baseline stage and size of PUs. Mean decrease in the stage of PU in the nifedipine group was significantly higher than the placebo group on day 7 (-1.71 vs. -0.16, respectively, P < 0.001) and day 14 (-0.78 vs. -0.09, respectively, P < 0.001). Furthermore, the mean decrease in the surface area of PU was significantly higher in the nifedipine group compared with the placebo group on day 7 (-1.44 vs. -0.32, respectively, P < 0.001) and day 14 (-2.51 vs. -0.24, respectively, P < 0.001) of study.

CONCLUSIONS

Topical application of nifedipine 3% ointment for 14 days significantly improved the healing process of stage I or II PUs in critically ill patients.

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.

Oral versus topical calcium channel blockers for chronic anal fissure-a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Chemical sphincterotomy with pharmacological agents is recommended as first line therapy for chronic anal fissures (CAF). Calcium channel blockers (CCB) are associated with similar efficacy but fewer side effects compared to nitrates. However, the optimal formulation (oral versus topical) is unknown. We aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the effectiveness of oral and topical CCB in the treatment of CAF.

METHODS

PubMed and Embase online databases were searched for relevant articles. Two independent reviewers performed methodological assessment and data extraction. Random effects models were used to calculate pooled effect size estimates. A sensitivity analysis was also carried out.

RESULTS

Four randomized controlled trials describing 279 patients (138 in oral, 141 in topical group) were examined. There was significant heterogeneity among studies. On random effects analysis, topical CCB were associated with a significantly lower rate of unhealed fissure (21.3% vs. 38.4%; OR = 2.65, 95% CI = 1.50 to 4.69, p = 0.0008) when compared to oral therapy. However, there were no significant differences in fissure recurrence (5.4% vs. 5.5%; OR = 1.01, 95% CI = 0.31 to 3.33, p = 0.98) or side effects (15.6% vs. 39.1%; OR = 4.54, 95% CI = 0.46 to 44.3, p = 0.19) between topical and oral CCB. On sensitivity analysis, having excluded the most heavily biased trial, topical CCB were associated with significantly fewer side effects compared to oral therapy (4.3% vs. 38.0%; OR = 13.16, 95% CI = 5.05 to 34.3, p < 0.00001).

CONCLUSIONS

Topical CCB are associated with better healing and fewer side effects when compared to oral therapy but there is no difference in recurrence rates.