Results of collagen plug occlusion of anal fistula: a multicentre study of 126 patients.

AIM: The Biodesign(®) anal fistula plug was introduced as a means of obliterating the fistula tract and promoting healing through biocompatibility. The results demonstrated unexplained variations from good to bad. This report analysed the results of a retrospective multicentre study. METHOD: All plug procedures performed in four Stockholm hospitals between June 2006 and June 2010 were identified and studied using a common protocol. The outcome after the first plug-insertion procedure was assessed by chart review performed a minimum of 8 months after plug insertion. Cox proportional-hazards models were used to assess the associations of various factors with fistula healing. RESULTS: One-hundred and twenty-six patients (mean age 47 years) were deemed suitable for the plug procedure. Eighty-five per cent of fistulae were cryptoglandular, 64% of patients were male and a mean of 2.9 previous fistulae procedures had been performed. All patients, except four, had an indwelling seton at the time of the plug procedure, which was performed in accordance with previously established principles of day surgery. After a median of 13 months, 30 (24%) fistulae had closed with no discomfort or secretion reported. The outcome in the four hospitals varied from 13% to 33% with similar numbers of patients in each hospital. A success rate of 12% was observed for patients with anterior fistula compared with 32% for those with posterior tracks [hazard ratio (HR) for successful healing = 2.98; 95% CI: 1.01-8.78) and 41% for those with a lateral internal opening (HR = 3.76; 95% CI: 1.03-13.75). Age, sex and number of previous procedures were not associated with healing. CONCLUSION: Four independent patient groups showed low success rates after the first plug-insertion procedure. Anterior fistulae were much less likely to heal compared with fistulae in other locations.

Role of surgeon-performed ultrasound on further management of patients with acute abdominal pain: a randomised controlled clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: The use of bedside ultrasound performed by the surgeon or emergency physician on duty at the emergency department is increasing. A study was performed which is the first randomised study to evaluate the benefits of surgeon-performed ultrasound for the management of the acute abdomen. METHODS: 800 patients who attended the emergency department at Stockholm South General Hospital, Sweden for abdominal pain were randomised either to receive or not receive surgeon-performed ultrasound as a complement to routine management. Outcome measures included the number of complementary investigations, time spent in the emergency department, admission rate, length of hospital stay if admitted, admission to surgery and timing of surgery if required. RESULTS: The number of complementary ultrasound examinations was considerably higher in the group who did not receive bedside ultrasound (18.8 percentage points difference, p<0.001). The admission rate was lower in the ultrasound group (7.2 percentage points difference, p = 0.041) and the proportion of patients requiring surgery submitted for surgery directly from the emergency department was higher in the ultrasound group (18.5 percentage points difference, p = 0.013). CONCLUSION: This study shows benefits in the management of the acute abdomen resulting in fewer further requested examinations, fewer admissions and shorter lead times to surgery. On the basis of these results, it is recommended for implementation in emergency departments. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00550511.

Impact of surgeon-performed ultrasound on diagnosis of abdominal pain.

BACKGROUND: A randomised study was performed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of surgeon-performed ultrasound in the emergency department for patients presenting with abdominal pain. METHODS: Surgeons responsible for the examination of study patients underwent 4 weeks of ultrasound training. 800 patients who were attending the emergency department for abdominal pain were randomised to undergo or not undergo surgeon-performed ultrasound as a complement to standard examination. The preliminary diagnosis made by the surgeon, with or without ultrasound, was compared with the final diagnosis made by a senior surgeon 6-8 weeks later. RESULTS: Diagnostic accuracy was significantly higher in the group examined with ultrasound (64.7% vs 56.8%, p = 0.027). Ultrasound proved to be helpful in making or confirming a correct diagnosis in 24.1% of cases receiving ultrasound and to contribute in 2.9%. In 22.3% of patients the diagnosis of non-specific pain was confirmed by normal findings. Ultrasound was misleading in 10.2% of cases and had no influence on the diagnosis in 40.0%. CONCLUSION: For patients with acute abdominal pain, higher diagnostic accuracy is achieved when surgeons use ultrasound as a diagnostic complement to standard examination. The use of bedside ultrasound should be considered in emergency departments.