@article{article_406511, title={Use of diagnostic modalities in the treatment of perianal fistula: A retrospective cohort study of 307 patients}, journal={Archives of Clinical and Experimental Medicine}, volume={3}, pages={49–52}, year={2018}, DOI={10.25000/acem.406511}, author={Şişik, Abdullah and Kılıç, Ali}, keywords={Perianal fistula,preoperative evaluation,fistula type,seton}, abstract={<div> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;line-height:200%;"> <span lang="en-us" style="font-size:12pt;line-height:200%;font-family:’Times New Roman’, serif;" xml:lang="en-us">Aim:
Deciding on the type of fistula and deciding on the most appropriate type of
surgery is still a challenge for anal fistula disease. In this study, we aimed
to evaluate whether magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), endoscopic examination
and co-administration of both in preoperative preparations of anal fistulas are
beneficial in this respect. </span> </p> <p> </p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;line-height:200%;"> <span lang="en-us" style="font-size:12pt;line-height:200%;font-family:’Times New Roman’, serif;" xml:lang="en-us">Methods:
The study was retrospectively performed in patients treated surgically for
perianal fistula between 2008 and 2017. The data of 307 patients operated for
anal fistulas were reviewed with hospital records. Patients were grouped under
the headings of preoperative MRI and non-MRI, endoscopic and non-endoscopic
examination, and both performed and non-performed. The demographic data (age,
sex), fistula type (simple or complicated), presence or absence of seton and
the type of surgery were recorded. These parameters were compared with the groups. </span> </p> <p> </p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;line-height:200%;"> <span lang="en-us" style="font-size:12pt;line-height:200%;font-family:’Times New Roman’, serif;" xml:lang="en-us">Results:
In the preoperative evaluation, 162 (53%) patients had MRI, 83 (27%) patients
had endoscopic examination and 60 (20%) patients had both. There was a
statistically significant correlation between the presence of preoperative MRI
and the need for seton placement (p <0.05 for all). Preoperative MRI,
preoperative endoscopy and preoperative both modalities groups didn’t show
statistically significant correlation with patient’s demographic data, fistula
type and surgical method (p> 0.05 for all). </span> </p> <p> </p> <span lang="en-us" style="font-size:12pt;line-height:115%;font-family:’Times New Roman’, serif;" xml:lang="en-us">Conclusion: Preoperative modalities such as MRI and
endoscopy are not sufficient in determining the type of fistula in an anal
fistula and determining the surgical method to be applied. We believe that
combining these studies with perioperative examination may be helpful in
obtaining more effective results. Also, performing MRI preoperatively may help
surgeons for decision of seton placement. </span> <br /> </div>}, number={2}, publisher={Mustafa HASBAHÇECİ}