Esfinterotomía lateral interna vs. toxina botulínica como tratamiento de la fisura anal / Lateral Internal Sphincterotomy versus Botulinum Toxin as Treatment of Anal Fissure

Introducción: La fisura anal crónica es una entidad frecuente que produce molestias durante y después de la defecación, su fisiopatología no es clara y su manejo es variado. La esfinterotomia lateral interna es una de las técnicas más utilizadas, aunque su elevado porcentaje de incontinencia no es aceptado y la inyección de toxina botulínica es una alternativa tentadora. Objetivo: Comparar los resultados de la inyección de toxina botulínica tipo A con la esfinterotomia lateral interna para tratamiento de la fisura anal en cuanto a dolor postoperatorio, recurrencia, curabilidad e incontinencia. Métodos: Se realizó un estudio tipo cohorte. A un grupo de 40 pacientes se trató con inyección de 50 UI de Toxina Botulínica tipo A y el otro grupo de 42 pacientes se le realizó esfinterotomia lateral interna. Los resultados se comparan estadísticamente para CI95 y error de 0,05. Resultados: La esfinterotomia vs toxina botulínica, resultó en cuanto a curabilidad en un 85,4 por ciento de los casos contra un 77,5 por ciento. Las recidivas se presentaron en 4,8 por ciento / 12,5 por ciento, la incontinencia ocurrió en 9,5 por ciento / 2,5 por ciento y el dolor posoperatorio estuvo presente en el 14,8 por ciento / 5,0 por ciento. Conclusiones: La esfinterotomia resultó mejor en cuanto a curabilidad y recidivas, mientras la aplicación de la toxina botulínica presentó mejores resultados en la incontinencia fecal y el dolor posoperatorio(AU)

Introduction: Chronic anal fissure is a frequent entity that produces discomfort during and after defecation. Its pathophysiology is not clear and its management is varied. Lateral internal sphincterotomy is one of the most used techniques, although its high percentage of incontinence is not accepted; botulinum toxin injection is therefore a tempting alternative. Objective: To compare the results of botulinum toxin type A injection or lateral internal sphincterotomy for treatment of anal fissure in terms of postoperative pain, recurrence, healing and incontinence. Methods: A cohort study was carried out. One group of 40 patients were treated with injection of 50 IU of botulinum toxin type A and another group of 42 patients underwent lateral internal sphincterotomy. The results were statistically compared with a confidence interval of 95 percent and error of 0.05. Results: Sphincterotomy and botulinum toxin were effective in terms of healing in 85.4 percent and 77.5 percent of cases, respectively. Recurrences occurred in 4.8 percent and 12.5 percent of cases, respectively. Incontinence occurred in 9.5 percent and 2.5 percent of cases, respectively. Postoperative pain was present in 14.8 percent and 5.0 percent of cases, respectively. Conclusions: Sphincterotomy was better in terms of healing and recurrence, while botulinum toxin application showed better results regarding fecal incontinence and postoperative pain(AU)

Treatment of anal fissures: Results from a national survey on French practice.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of an anal fissure (AF) is based on medical treatment (nonoperative therapies) and surgical procedures. However, the choice of treatment and its role in therapeutic strategy vary from one country to another, and to date, no standard French recommendation is currently available. Our aim was to assess French practices in the treatment of AFs. METHODS: A national survey of members of the French National Society of Colo-Proctology (SNFCP) was carried out using an online questionnaire (1) to evaluate French practice and (2) to compare them with guidelines of other societies. RESULTS: Two hundred responses were obtained among the 300 registered members, representing a participation rate of 67%. Members of the SNFCP agree with all scientific societies on the importance of first-line medical treatment, with surgery proposed as a second-line treatment in the case of the failure of well-conducted medical treatment. However, calcium channel blockers and topical nitrates as first-line treatment are rarely prescribed in France. Priority is therefore given to "simple" topical healing products and oral analgesics on demand. Similarly, surgical management differs since LIS is the "gold standard" in most guidelines, whereas in France, despite the data in the literature, fissurectomy is the first-line treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Our study indicated the fissure treatment discrepancies of France with other countries concerning the usage of topical treatments and the choice of first-line surgical treatments that is currently considered a "French exception".