ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Distal feeding (DF) describes the insertion of a feeding tube into a fistula or stoma to administer a liquid feed into the distal bowel. It is currently used clinically in patients who are unable to absorb enough nutrition orally. This systematic review investigates DF as a therapeutic measure across a spectrum of patients with stomas and fistulae. METHODS: A total of 2825 abstracts and 44 full-text articles were screened via OVID. Fifteen papers were included for analysis. Randomised controlled trials, cohort and observational studies investigating DF as a therapeutic measure were included. RESULTS: Three feeds were used across the studies-reinfusion of effluent, infusion of prebiotic or a mixture. The studies varied the length of feeding between 24 hours and 61 days, and the mode of feeding, bolus or continuous varied.DF was demonstrated to effectively wean patients from parenteral nutrition in two papers. Two papers demonstrated a significant reduction in stoma output. Three papers demonstrated improved postoperative complication rates with distal feeding regimens, including ileus (2.85% vs 20% in unfed population, p=0.024). One paper demonstrated a reduction in postoperative stool frequency. CONCLUSIONS: This review was limited by study heterogeneity and the lack of trial data, and in the patient groups involved, the variability in diet and length of regimen. These studies suggest that DF can significantly reduce stoma output and improve renal and liver function; however, the mechanism is not clear. Further mechanistic work on the immunological and microbiological action of DF would be important.
ABSTRACT
AIM: This systematic review aimed to assess the outcomes of fistulotomy or fistulectomy and immediate sphincter repair (FISR) in relation to healing, incontinence and sphincter dehiscence both overall and in patients with high anal fistulae. METHODS: Medline, Embase and The Cochrane library were searched for studies of patients undergoing FISR for anal fistula. Data regarding healing, continence and sphincter dehiscence were extracted overall and for high anal fistulae. The DerSimonian-Laird random-effects method was used for pooled analysis, heterogeneity between studies was assessed based on the significance of between-study heterogeneity, and on the size of the I2 value. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. RESULTS: We identified 21 studies evaluating 1700 patients. Pooled analysis of healing reached 93% (95% CI: 91%-95%, I2 = 51% p-value for heterogeneity = 0.004), with continence disturbance and worsening continence reaching 11% (95% CI: 6%-18%, I2 = 87% p < 0.001) and 8% (95% CI: 4%-13%, I2 = 74% p < 0.001), respectively. Subgroup analysis according to fistula height could only be conducted on limited data. Pooled healing in high anal fistulae was 89% (95% CI: 84%-94%, I2 = 76% p < 0.001), 16% suffered disturbance of continence (95% CI: 7%-27%, I2 = 89% p < 0.001), 8% worsening continence from baseline (95% CI: 2%-16%, I2 = 80% p < 0.001) and 2% suffered sphincter dehiscence (95% CI: 0%-10%, I2 = 89% p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The evidence suggests FISR is a safe, effective procedure. However, data are limited by inconsistencies in reporting of continence and definition of fistula height, particularly high anal fistulae. Significant heterogeneity means that outcomes in high fistulae remain uncertain.
