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
376 I. E. Gecim
Steele SR, Kumar R, Feingold DL et al (2011) Practice parameters for the management of perianal
abscess and stula-in-ano. Dis Colon Rectum 54:1465–1474 Stellingwerf ME, van Praag EM, Tozer PJ, Bemelman WA, Buskens CJ (2019 Jun) Systematic
review and meta-analysis of endorectal advancement ap and ligation of the intersphincteric
stula tract for cryptoglandular and Crohns high perianal stula. BJS Open 3(3):231–241 Tan K-K, Tan IJ, Lim FS, Koh DC, Tsang CB (2011) The anatomy of failures following the ligation
of intersphincteric tract technique for anal stula: a review of 93 patients over 4 years. Dis Colon
Rectum 54(11):1368–1372 Tan KK, Alsuwaigh R, Tan AM, et al (2012) To LIFT or to ap? Which surgery to perform
following seton insertion for high anal stula? Dis Colon Rectum 55:1273–7 van der Hagen SJ, Baeten CG, Soeters PB, van Gemert WG (2006) Long-term outcome following
mucosal advancement ap for high perianal stulas and stulotomy for low perianal stulas:
recurrent perianal stulas: failure of treatment or recurrent patient disease? Int J Color Dis 21(8):
784–790 Visscher AP, Schuur D, Roos R, Van der Mijnsbrugge GJ, Meijerink WJ, Felt-Bersma RJ
(2015 May) Long-term follow-up after surgery for simple and complex cryptoglandular stulas:
fecal incontinence and impact on quality of life. Dis Colon Rectum 58(5):533–539 Wallin UG, Mellgren AF, Madoff RD, Goldberg SM (2012) Does ligation of the intersphincteric
stula tract raise the bar in stula surgery? Dis Colon Rectum 55:1173–8

Anal Fistula: Glue and Paste Injection

24
Klaus E. Matzel and Birgit Bittorf
Contents
1 Introduction . ............... .................................................................. 378
2 Fibrin Glue ..... ............................. ............................ .................... 378
3 Collagen Paste ... . ................................... ........................................ 386
4 Conclusion ................................................................................... 388
5 Cross-References .......................... ............................................. ..... 388
References ............................ ............................................... ............ 389
Abstract
The use of glue or paste as a sealant for anal stula is an attractive treatment
concept, as it can effect closure without jeopardizing fecal continence or inter-
fering with potential future interventions. Multiple substances have been explored
in the past, with brin glue and collagen paste being the most recent. This chapter
presents the ndings of non-randomized controlled studies with 25 patients and
available randomized controlled trials. Evidence for the clinical effectiveness of
stula closure with brin glue is low; for collagen paste, data are even fewer.
Available information is heterogeneous with regard to indication, outcome mon-
itoring, and assessment. Study methodology varies widely. Randomized trials
with brin glue indicate that the clinical benet is limited. Despite this, the
therapeutic concept of stula closure with glue and paste remains of interest
because of its very low invasiveness.
Keywords
Anal stula · Paste · Glue · Anal stula sealing
K. E. Matzel (*) · B. Bittorf Department of Surgery, University Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany e-mail: Klaus.Matzel@uk-erlangen.de
© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 C. Ratto et al. (eds.), Anal Fistula and Abscess, Coloproctology,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-76670-2_26
377
378 K. E. Matzel and B. Bittorf

1 Introduction

The aim of anal stula treatment is twofold: to remove the stula tract and to preserve continence function. Over the years, multiple techniques have been advo­cated: some declined in popularity, and several remained as part of the current surgical armamentarium. The fact that there are still several techniques not only reects the complexity of the condition, but also indicates that no perfect solution has yet been found.
Conceptually, lling a stula tract with foreign material offers several advantages: It closes the stula tract in a technically easy manner; and the anal sphincter complex is not damaged (or, if so, in a very limited way), thus reducing the risk of post­interventional fecal incontinence. Also, the impact on potential further interventions is minimal.
Since decades, various substances have been applied as paste or glue installations. Some have been used as an element of a combined technique, such as mucosa advancement ap. Regardless of the substance applied, the operative intervention commonly starts after the control of sepsis with a thorough removal of the epithelium in the stula tract, granulation tissue, and debris (also seton removal if it had been placed earlier for drainage and to decrease inammatory activity). Most commonly, curettage is used for epithelium removal and debridement. The handling of the inner stula opening after lling varies: techniques used for closing differ.
Certain lling substances, such as Cyanoacrylat and BioGlue serum albumin [BSA] and glutaraldehyde) (Barillari et al. 2006; Jain et al. 2008;de la Portilla 2008), can be considered historic; brin glue and collagen paste are treatment options of current interest.
®
(puried bovine

2 Fibrin Glue

Since the rst description of brin glue for the treatment of anal stula in the early 1990s (Hjortrup et al. 1991; Abel et al. 1993), multiple studies have be en published, and no signicant difference has been demonstrated between commercially available and autologous brin glue (Park et al. 2000). The design of the studies varies (see Table 1 for reports with more than 25 patients (Cintron et al. 1999; Cintron et al.
2000; Patrlj et al. 2000; Sentovich 2001; Jurczak et al. 2004; Gisbertz et al. 2005;
Singer et al. 2005; Maralcan et al. 2006; Ellis and Clark 2006; Witte et al. 2007; Tyler et al. 2007; Adams et al. 2008; van Koperen et al. 2008; de Parades et al. 2010; Garcia-Olmo et al. 2009; Altomare et al. 2010; Queralto et al. 2010; Yeung et al.
2010; de Oca et al. 2011; Maralcan et al. 2011; Herreros et al. 2012; Mishra et al. 2013; Cestaro et al. 2014)), the majority being retrospective (N ¼ 10), several
prospective (N ¼ 8), and some randomized and comparative (N ¼ 4). Follow up ranges from 3.5 to 54 months.
The inclusion criteria vary: Most of the studies include simple and complex stulae. Rectovaginal stulae are mentioned in 3 and Crohns stula in 6. Outcome reporting differs signicantly: Although all studies report on stula healing (with
24 Anal Fistula: Glue and Paste Injection 379
Follow-up(months)
Impaired
continence
(%)
Recurrence
(%)
Prospective 61 (I: 82; II:62) n.a. n.a. 12
(18–36)
Retrospective A: 21; B: 40; 31 n.a. 0 27
n.a. n.a. 12
75)
n.a. 7
n.a.;
(continued)
2x abscess
54
Table 1 Results of brin glue installation in studies with 25 patients*
et al. 1999)
(12/76)
2000 76 I–IV 16
Cintron (Cintron
et al. 2000)
Crohns
(%) Study design Healing (%)
1999 26 I, II, III 8 (2/26) Prospective 81 n.a. n.a. 3.5
Cintron (Cintron
Study Year N Fistula type
2000 69 I, II 0 Retrospective 74 (I: 77; II: 70) n.a. n.a. 28
Patrlj (Patrlj et al.
10 Prospective 60 10 (3/29) 0 22 (6–48)
2003 48 Simple/
2000)
Sentovich (Sentovich
complex
2004 31 II, III n.a. Retrospective 75 n.a. 0 9
2001)
Jurczak (Jurczak
et al. 2004)
2005 27 I, II 0 Retrospective 33 n.a. 0 6
2005 75 n.a. 12.5
Gisbertz (Gisbertz
et al. 2005)
Singer (Singer et al.
(2/24)
2006 36 I, II, III 0 Prospective 78 (I: 44; II: 91; III:
2005)
Maralcan (Maralcan
Yes n.a. Simple 56; complex
I-IV
2006 28 n.a. 0 Randomized 54 n.a. n.a. 22
2007 34 Subcutaneous,
2007 89 II, III 0 Retrospective 55 n.a. n.a. n.a.
et al. 2006)
Ellis (Ellis and Clark
2006)
Witte (Witte et al.
2007)
Tyler (Tyler et al.
2007)
380 K. E. Matzel and B. Bittorf
Follow-up(months)
Impaired
continence
(%)
Recurrence
(%)
16 (4/25) n.a. n.a. 38
Multicenter
(21–43)
n.a. n.a. 5.2 (1–16)
Retrospective Crohns: 0
High stula: 28.6
(8/28)
Simple stula: 41.7
(5/12)
37 0 54
Longterm: 63 (after
repeated injections)
Crohns
Table 1 (continued)
(%) Study design Healing (%)
Study Year N Fistula type
2008 36 II 0 Retrospective 66 6 n.a. 6
Adams (Adams et al.
7.5
(3/40)
pouch-vaginal
2008 26 II (distal) 0 Retrospective 44 n.a. n.a. 13
2010 29 I, II, III, RVF 0 Retrospective 56 15 n.a. 12
2008)
Van Koperen (van
Koperen et al. 2008)
De Parades
(de Parades et al.
2010)
2009 25 II, III, RVF 29 Randomized
Garcia-Olmo
(Garcia-Olmo et al.
2010 38 II 0 Randomized 39 n.a. 0 12
2009)
Altomare (Altomare
2010 34 II, III 0 Retrospective 68 n.a. 0 34
2010 40 I, II, III, RVF,
et al. 2010)
Yeung (Yeung et al.
Queralto(Queralto
et al. 2010)
2011 28 II 0 Prospective 68 n.a. 0 20 (3–60)
2011 46 II, III 0 Prospective 87
2010)
De Oca (de Oca et al.
2011)
Maralcan (Maralcan
et al. 2011)
24 Anal Fistula: Glue and Paste Injection 381
n.a. 0 6
High: 57
n.a. Prospective Low: 81
2012 56 II, III 0 Randomized 37 n.a. n.a. 12
2013 30 II, III,
Herreros (Herreros
et al. 2012)
Mishra (Mishra et al.
recurrence
2014 26 I, II 0 Prospective 69 23 0 12
2013)
Cestaro (Cestaro
et al. 2014)
aAdapted from reference (Ommer et al. 2017), n.a. not available, RVF rectovaginal stula
382 K. E. Matzel and B. Bittorf
Follow-up
(months)
Continence
impaired
(%)
Recurrence
(%)
Study
design Healing (%)
n.a. 0 17.1
(5.7–21.6)
Fibrin glue 50 (3/6),
conventional 100 (7/7),
p ¼ 0.06
Complex stulas:
Fibrin glue 69 (9/13)
Conventional 13 (2/16)
p ¼ 0.003
n.a. n.a. 3.5
Bioprosthetic plug
87 (2/15)
p < 0.05
n.a. n.a. 22
(12–36)
glue 54
Flap alone 80
p < 0.05
n.a. n.a. 2
Fibrin glue 16 (4/25)
Fibrin glue + adipose-
derived stem cells
Multicentric
71 (17/24)
p < 0.001
n.a. 0 12
049
60
Seton 88 (21/24)
p ¼ 0.0007
(29–59)
20
Advancement ap
Table 2 Results of brin glue installation in randomized trials
N
M. Crohn
(%)
Fistula
type
glue)
(brin
Author Year
2002 19 I, II, III Yes Randomized Simple stulas:
Lindsey (Lindsey
et al. 2002)
2006 10 II 0 Randomized Fibrin glue 40 (4/10)
Johnson (Johnson
et al. 2006)
2006 28 n.a. 0 Randomized Advancement ap + brin
Ellis (Ellis and
29 Randomized
RVF
2009 25 II, III,
Garcia-Olmoa
(Garcia-Olmo et al.
Clark 2006)
2009)
2011 38 II 0 Randomized Fibrin glue 39 (15/38)
Altomare (Altomare
et al. 2010)
2011 15 II, III 0 Randomized Fibrin glue 40 (6/15)
2000)
Van der Hagen
(Park et al.
24 Anal Fistula: Glue and Paste Injection 383
024
7/12
80 (3/15)
p ¼ 0.03
n.a. n.a. 12
Adipose-derived stem
cells + brin glue 52
Stem cells 57
p ¼ 0.13
n.a. 0 12
42, partial 17)
Platelet-rich plasma
71 (complete 48, partial
23)
p ¼ 0.608
1/11
Adipose-derived stem
cells 50
p ¼ 0.129
2012 56 II, III 0 Randomized Fibrin glue 37
Herreros (Herreros
et al. 2012)
2019 24 I, II, III 0 Randomized Fibrin glue 58 (complete
de la Portilla (de la
Portilla et al. 2019)
0 Randomized Fibrin glue 26
IV
2020 21 II, III,
Garcia-Arranz
(Garcia-Arranz et al.
2020)
n.a. not available
384 K. E. Matzel and B. Bittorf
varying denitions) and provide length of follow-up, recurrence is only addressed in 5 and continence function in 10. The substance application is not uniform: Some authors report repeated applications in cases of initial treatment failure.
Overall, the studies show a highly variable outcome, with healing rates in cryptoglandular stulae between 21% and 87% (long-term 63%), recurrence of 10 to 37%. (Impaired continence is not found but is more often not reported.)
A few randomized studies compare brin applications with other anal stula therapies (see Table 2 (Ellis and Clark 2006; Garcia-Olmo et al. 2009 ; Altomare et al.
2010; Herreros et al. 2012; Lindsey et al. 2002; Johnson et al. 2006; van der Hagen
et al. 2011; de la Portilla et al. 2019; Garcia-Arranz et al. 2020)): brin glue versus conventional stula treatment (e.g., stul otomy or loose seton insertion with or without subsequent advancement ap (Lindsey et al. 2002)); brin glue versus anal suturable bioprosthetic stula plug (Johnson et al. 2006); ap repair with brin glue versus ap repair alone (Ellis and Clark 2006); brin glue alone or brin glue plus 20 million expanded adipose-derived stem cells (ASCs) (Garcia-Olmo et al.
2009); brin glue versus cutting seton application (Altomare et al. 2010); brin glue
with and without closure of the internal stula opening versus a mucosal advance­ment ap (van der Hagen et al. 2011); stem cells versus stem cells plus brin glue versus brin glue alone (Herreros et al. 2012); autologously prepared platelet-rich plasma versus brin glue alone (de la Portilla et al. 2019); ASCs plus brin glue versus brin glue alone (Garcia-Arranz et al.
2020).
In a randomized comparative study, patients with simple (low stulae) and complex stulae (high, Crohns, and low with compromised sphincter) underwent either brin glue or conventional treatment consisting of stulotomy or loose seton insertion with or without subsequent advancement ap (Lindsey et al. 2002). At a median follow-up of 17 months, stula healing after primary brin glue was observed in 42% (8/19). In ve cases of second brin glue application after evalu­ation at 3 months, the healing rate was 80% (4/5). A cumulative success with one or two brin applications was achieved in 63% (12/19). In simple stulae, healing after brin glue application was 50% (3/6), 100% (7/7) after stulotomy (difference, 50%; condence interval, 10% to 90%; P < 0.06). The healing rate in complex stulae was 69% (9/13), after conventional treatment 13% (2/16) (difference, 56%; 95% con­dence interval, 25.9% to 86.1%; P < 0.003). No changes in baseline incontinence score, maximum resting pressures, or squeeze pressures were found in either study arm. Patient satisfaction was higher in the brin glue group.
A randomized comparison of brin glue and anal suturable bioprosthetic stula plug (Surgisis, Cook Surgical, Inc.) that included 25 patients (10 brin glue, 15 stula plug) with high transsphincteric stulae revealed that, at a follow-up of 3 months, 60% of the brin glue group had persistence of one or more stulae versus 13% (2/15) in the plug group (P < 0.05) (Johnson et al. 2006).
The study comparing the combination of ap repair and brin glue versus ap repair alone in a randomized setting (Ellis and Clark 2006) included 58 patients. An anodermal advancement ap was performed in 22, a mucosal advancement ap in 36; 30 patients were treated with ap alone, and 28 with a combination of ap and
brin glue. In the latter group, 17 patients underwent mucosal advancement
ap, and
24 Anal Fistula: Glue and Paste Injection 385
11 anodermal advancement ap. At a median follow-up of 22 months, the stula recurrence rate in all the 58 patients was 32.6%, with a 20% (6/30) recurrence rate for stulae repaired with advancement ap alone and 46.4% (13/28) for stulae repaired by advancement ap with brin glue (P < 0.05).
In a randomized comparison of treatment of complex perianal stulae (both cryptoglandular [N ¼ 35] and associated with Crohns disease [N ¼ 14]) with brin glue or brin glue plus 20 million expanded ASCs (Garcia-Olmo et al. 2009), stula healing at 8 weeksfollow-up was found in 71% of patients (17/24) treated with brin glue plus ASCs and in 16% of patients (4/25) who received brin glue alone (P < 0.001). At 1 year, the recurrence rate in patients treated with ASCs was 17.6%. In cases of persistent stula at 8 weeks, a second dose of brin glue or brin glue plus 40 million ASCs was applied. The healing rate was similar in patients with Crohns disease and those with cryptoglandular stulae. Quality of life scores were higher in patients who received brin glue with ASCs.
In a comparison of patients with medium or high transsphincteric cryptoglandular anal stulae randomized to brin glue (N ¼ 38) versus cutting seton (N ¼ 25), a minimum follow-up of 1 year demonstrated a healing rate of 88% in the seton group and 39% in the brin glue group (P ¼ 0.0007) (Altomare et al. 2010). In case of nonhealing patients, they were again randomized to seton treatment (N ¼ 15) or brin glue (N ¼ 8). Overall healing rate for seton treatment was 74%, for brin glue 38%. Incontinence increased from 6 to 15 patients in the seton group (Mean Cleveland Clinic Incontinence score 1.79 4.4 to 5.1 5.9 [P ¼ 0.0017]); no signicant changes in continence were seen after brin glue treatment. In the 23 patients in whom brin glue had failed, randomization to a second brin glue injection (N ¼ 8) or seton treatment (N ¼ 15) was undertaken. Subsequent healing was 50% in the brin group (4/8) and 60% (9/15) with seton use.
In a randomized study comparing brin glue (N ¼ 15) with a mucosal advance­ment ap (N ¼ 15) in complex cryptoglandular stulae, the recurrence rate in the group with mucosal advancement ap after seton drainage was 20% (3/15) at a median follow-up of 52 months (26–60 months) and 60% (9/15) in the group with brin glue after seton drainage at 49 months (29–59 months) (P ¼ 0.03). No new onset of incontinence was observed (van der Hagen et al. 2011).
Another randomized comparative study (Herreros et al. 2012) revealed that, after 24 to 26 weeks, the healing rate after the application of 20 million ASCs after closure of the internal stula opening (64 patients) was 39.1%, after ASCs plus brin glue after internal stula closure (60 patients) 43.3%, and after brin glue alone after closure 37.3% (59 patients). At 1-year follow-up, the corresponding healing rates were 57.1%, 52.4%, and 37.3% (p ¼ 0.13). In cases of stula persistence at 12 weeks, a second dose (40 million ASCs) was administered in the two stem-cell treatment groups.
In a randomized study, the application of autologously prepared platelet-rich plasma (PRP) (N ¼ 32) was compared with brin glue installation (N ¼ 24) for high cryptoglandular anal stulae without active sepsis. At 1-year foll ow-up for all stula types, the improved overall healing rate for PRP-treated cases was 71% and for brin glue 58.3% (P ¼ 0.608), the complete healing rate 48.4% versus 41.7%,