Добавил:
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз: Предмет: Файл:
Ординатура / Хирургия / Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана / Книга_1056_Библиотеки_им_академика_М_И_Перельмана.pdf
Скачиваний:
0
Добавлен:
31.08.2026
Размер:
23 Мб
Скачать
18 Fistulectomy 293
Fig. 8 Pudendal nerve terminal motor latency (PNTML) testing and anal electromyography (EMG) equipment
Fig. 9 Terminal ileal deep and wide ulcerations noted on colonoscopy in a patient who presented with anal stula. Biopsies conrmed Crohns disease with granulomas
294 M. A. Abbas
3.2 Patient Positioning
While stulectomy can be performed in the lithotomy position, my personal prefer­ence is the prone jackknife position (Fig. 10) which provides ample access to the anus and the perineum. Retracting the buttocks laterally and securing them in place with tape offers the surgeon and the assistant great exposure to the surgical eld. The prone jackknife position allows for clear visualization of the anal region. With the surgeon on one side of the patient and the assistant on the opposite side, it offers both surgeon and assistant the unhindered physical space to conduct the operation with ease.
Fig. 10 Prone jackknife position
18 Fistulectomy 295
3.2.1 Technical Steps
Fistulectomy can be achieved by two different techniques: (1) the coring-out tech­nique with en bloc excision of the entire stula tract including skin, subcutaneous tissue, stula tract, and surrounding cuff of sphincter muscle with closure of the intramuscular portion of the internal opening or (2) division of the stula over a probe and limiting the excision to the epithelialized tract of the stula. I prefer the second option as it is done under direct visualization and it minimizes any potent ial anal sphincter damage and loss especi ally to the proximal portion of the sphincter cephalad to the stulous tract. Furthermore, in select group of patients, it allows for the proper exposure for sphincter muscle repair.
The anorectum is evacuated of any residual stool and irrigated with an antiseptic solution such as betadine. Rigid proctoscopy is often helpful to inspect the cleanness of the rectum, to perform betadine antiseptic irrigation, and to exclude any other rectal pathology including proctitis. The rst step of the operation is to clearly identify the internal openin g of the stula with the passage of a probe from the external to the internal opening. If there is an existing seton, it is removed after clearly marking the internal opening. If no seton is present, hydrogen peroxide injection can be helpful in delineating the internal opening. With the stula probe inserted inside the stula, 0.5% bupivacaine solution is injected into the tissue surrounding the stula for preemptive analgesia (Fig. 11).
Fig. 11 0.5% bupivacaine injected into the tissue surrounding the stula for preemptive analgesia
296 M. A. Abbas
Fig. 12 The Pratt bivalve speculum
An anoscope is used for anal exposure. I prefer the Pratt bivalve speculum for most of my proctologic cases (Fig. 12). The probe is advanced from the external to the internal opening until it clearly protrudes into the anal canal (Fig. 13). Electro­cautery (thermal cautery) is used to divide the tract over the probe. Care is taken to divide the tissue in a perpendicular fashion, avoiding a tangential oblique dissection which leads to more muscle division (Fig. 14). Once the division of the stula is completed into the lumen of the anus, the immediate tissue surrounding the stulous tract is inltrated with additional 0.5% bupivacaine anesthetic to create a buffer dissection plane between the epithelialized tract and the adjacent sphincter muscle (Fig. 15). Using ne tip tenotomy scissors and tooth forceps (Fig. 16), the epithelialized tract is separated from the surrounding muscular cuff for a precise dissection with minimal damage to the anal sphincter (Fig. 17). The excised tissue is sent for histopathologic evaluation. The mucosal aspect of the internal opening and surrounding glands is fulgurated with electrocautery (Fig. 18). In order to reduce the wound size, the edge of the skin is marsupialized to the center of the wound using a running 2.0 Vicryl (polyglycolic acid) suture from the distal anus to the anoderm portion of the wound (Fig. 19). At the completion of the marsupialization, the wound center is open to promote adequate drainage and minimize the risks of postoperative sepsis (Fig. 20).
Fistulectomy with sphincter reconstruction can be considered in some patients. It is achieved by approximation of the external sphincter muscle using a row of
18 Fistulectomy 297
Fig. 13 The stula probe linking the external with the internal stula opening
horizontal mattress stitches. Care is taken to avoid recreating a stulous tract underneath the reconstruction. The technique of sphincter repair following stulotomy or stulectomy is described in detail in another chapter in this book and previous publications (Ratto et al. 2013, 2015; Litta et al. 2019).

4 Postoperative Care

Fistulectomy is undertaken on an outpatient basis in the majority of patients. Discharge to home is achieved after a short period of observation in the postoper­ative recovery unit. Once discharge criteria are met and the patient is able to void urine, the patient is discharged home. Overnight observation can be considered in patients with signicant medical comorbidities, large wounds with signicant pain issues, or those who undergo sphincter reconstruction and have muscle spasm pain requiring intravenous medications or urination issues necessitating bladder catheterization.
When sphincter repair is undertaken, the patient may experience some degree of muscular spasm for a few days which is best treated with a benzodiazepine muscle relaxant such as diazepam. In most patients, postoperative pain is adequately controlled with paracetamol and nonsteroidal anti-inammatory medications (NSAIDS) such as ibuprofen, naproxen, or diclofenac. Severe pain can be relieved
298 M. A. Abbas
Fig. 14 Electrocautery divides the tract over the stula probe in a perpendicular fashion
with a short course of tramadol or a codeine-based medication such as oxycodone or hydrocodone. I reserve oral antibiotics for patients who undergo sphincter recon­struction. A 1-week course of a combination of ciprooxacin and metronidazole or a cephalosporin and metronidazole is sufcient. Postoperative constipation should be avoided. A bulking agent such as psyllium husk is recommended once or twice a day and if needed, with the addition of a gentle laxative such as bisacodyl tablets or lactulose syrup.
The patient is advised to perform a 15-minute sitz bath in warm water twice a day for 2 weeks. A thin wet to dry gauze dressing is used as a wick inside the depth of the wound and changed twice a day for 1 to 2 weeks depending on the size of the wound. The rst postoperative visit is scheduled between 10 and 14 days and every 2 weeks thereafter until the wound is healed.

5 Results

The interpretation of outcome data is critical when managing patients with anal stula. It is important to note that the current literature on anal stula treatment is mostly retrospective in nature. Such studies are challenging to understand due to
18 Fistulectomy 299
Fig. 15 Additional 0.5% bupivacaine injection into the tissue cuff surrounding the divided stula to create a buffer plane for dissection
their heterogene ity and lack of standardization in de ning various variables related to the disease, intervention, and outcome measures. An ideal literature and data would include standard reporting par ameters of patie nt and stula characteristics, prior interventions, a detailed description of operative technique, a clearly dened set of outcome variables, and a minimum follow-up period. All of these elements are important for an accurate comparison of results. F or instance, the difference in terminology for persistent vs. recurren t disease is often blurred and inconsistent. Some failures are classied as recurrence, when in reality they should be reported as persistence of the disease. Furthermore, most studies combine both failure and recurrent disease as one outcome va riable of recurrence. Similarly, many studies do not make a clear distinction between stulotomy whic h entails division of the stula only vs. stulectomy which necessitates excision of the stulous tract. Academically speaking, the terms of stulotomy a nd stulectomy should not be used interchangeably as reported in some studies even when stulectomy is limited to excision of the stulous t ract without any muscle. An additional challenge is the sporadic and loose reporting of functional outcome and the lack of adequate follow-up to assess the long-term outcome. With those limitations in mind, the following section presents some of the results reported for this technique.
300 M. A. Abbas
Fig. 16 Fine tip tenotomy scissors and tooth forceps
5.1 Fistulectomy
Sheikh and colleagues compared the outcome of stulotomy and stulectomy in 262 male patients with low lying anal stula (Sheikh et al. 2015). Mean healing time was 4.04 weeks in the stulotomy group vs. 4.57 weeks in patients undergo­ing stulectomy ( p ¼ 0.108). The recurrence rate was slightly lower in the stulotomy group compared to the stulectomy group (10.7% vs. 15.3%, p ¼ 0.27). Salem reported his experience with 272 patients treated for low anal stula over a 10-year period (Salem 2012). The mean follow-up was 12 months (range 1–24). Recurrence rate was 6% in patients who underwent stulectomy and 10% in those with stulotomy. The reported healing time was 3 weeks vs. 4 weeks in the stulectomy and stulotomy groups, respectively. Barase and Shinde reported a comparative study of stulotomy and stulectomy in the management of 84 patients with simple anal stula (Barase and Shinde 2018). The patients were equally divided into the two groups. The median duration of healing was shorter in the stulotomy group (12 days vs. 21 days, p < 0.001). During a mean follow-up of 6 months, a recurrence rate of 2.38% was similar in both groups. Kanchwala and colleagues studied the recurrence rates after stulotomy and stulectomy (Kanchwala et al. 2018). They tracked 110 patients undergoing stulect omy and stulotomy for primary or recurrent low anal stula for 6 months. Recurrence rate was9.4%vs.12.3%inthestulectomy and stulotomy groups, respectively
18 Fistulectomy 301
Fig. 17 Fine tip tenotomy scissor dissects the epithelialized tract off the surrounding sphincter muscle minimizing any damage to anal musculature
( p ¼ 0.763). Tobisch and colleagues reported their results w ith total stulectomy with simple closure of the internal opening in the management of complex cryptoglandular stulas (Tobisch et al. 2012). A total of 252 patients were studied with a median follow-up of 70 months (range 14–141). Fistula closure was noted in 74% of the patients. The success rate was highest in patients with posterior trans­sphincteric or supra-sphincteric stulas compared to other types of stulas (82% vs. 67%, p ¼ 0.014). Athanasiadis and colleagues prospectively studied 169 patients with high st ula who underwent stulectomy with occlusion of the internal stula opening (Athanasiadis et al. 1991). A total of 147 patients had high trans-sphincteric stula and 22 presented with supra-sphincteric. Their modied technique included one-stage stulectomy with the addition of internal sphincterotomy for the drainage of the intersphincteric space. The internal aspect of the intramuscular aspect of the stula was closed and the external aspect was left open to heal by secondary intention. During a mean follow-up of 3.2 years, 32 patients (18.9%) required re-operation for recurrent abscess or stula of imme­diate failure of the procedure.
Fistulectomy is overall safe with a low rate of postoperative complications. Sheikh and colleagues reported an incidence of postoperative bleeding in 3.1% of patients and infections in 3.8% (Sheikh et al. 2015). In their study of 252 patients, Tobisch and colleagues reported early reoperation in 12 patients (4.76%) for suture line dehiscence (Tobisch et al. 2012).
302 M. A. Abbas
Fig. 18 Fulguration of the mucosal aspect of the internal opening and surrounding glands to minimize recurrence
In his study of 146 patients undergoing stulectomy for low stula, Salem reported no incontinence (Salem 2012). However, it is unclear whether formal surveying or assessment of the patients was conducted to carefully document any continence disturbance. In the study reported by Barase, the incontinence rate was
11.9% in the stulotomy patients compared to 2.38% in stulectomy ( p < 0.05) (Barase and Shinde 2 018). Kanchwala and colleagues assessed patients inconti­nence in 110 patients using the Cleveland Clinic Florida Incontinence score (Kanchwala et al. 2018). At 6 months follow-up, continence level was normal in
92.5% vs. 91.2% of the stulectomy and stulotomy groups, respectively ( p ¼ 0.564). However, such a high continence rate was not noted in the study by Tobisch and colleagues who meas ured continence using the same scale (Tobisch et al. 2012). Normal postoperative continence was noted in only 56% of the healed patients without prior anal stula surgery. In their prospective study, Athanasiadis and colleagues performed preoperative and postoperative anal manometry in their patients. They noted a decrease in anal rest ing and squeeze pressure of 10 to 40% from baseline with an approximate average of 30% (Athanasiadis et al. 1991). A postoperative impairment of continence was noted in 15% of the patients who had not been previously operated and in 40% of patients with previous operations. In the majority of those patients, soiling was noted but total incontinence to formed stool was not noted.