Добавил:
Sekretar
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
X
- •Preface
- •Contents
- •About the Editors
- •Contributors
- •3 Host Factors: Age, Gender, Lifestyle
- •4 IBD and Other Etiologically Relevant Comorbid Conditions
- •5 Anatomical Presentation and Rectovaginal Fistula
- •6 Anal Fistula Development: Microbiological Factors
- •7 Recurrence and Cancer Risk
- •8 Conclusion
- •References
- •1 Epidemiology of Anal Fistula and Abscess
- •1 Introduction
- •2 Incidence and Prevalence
- •2.1 Europe
- •2.2 USA and Canada
- •2 Anorectal Anatomy Related to Anal Fistula and Abscess
- •1 Introduction
- •2 Mucosal Layer and Submucosal Space
- •3 Internal Anal Sphincter
- •4 Intersphincteric Space and Conjoint Longitudinal Muscle
- •5 External Anal Sphincter
- •6 Pelvic Floor
- •7 Extra-anal Spaces/Ischioanal Fossae
- •8 Anal Glands
- •10 Conclusion
- •11 Cross-References
- •References
- •3 Anorectal Physiology Related to Anal Fistula and Abscess
- •1 Principal Aspects of Anorectal Physiology
- •1.1 Secretory Function of the Anorectum and the Cryptoglandular Hypothesis
- •1.2 Histology and Cellular Physiology of the Anorectum and Fistula
- •1.3 Microbiology and Fistula
- •1.4 Host Factors Relevant to Abscess and Fistula
- •1.5 Anal Continence
- •1.5.1 The Rectum
- •1.5.2 The Musculature of the Pelvic Floor and Sphincter Complex
- •1.6 Defecation
- •1.7 Anorectal Physiology Testing in the Context of Fistula
- •1.7.2 Perioperative Anorectal Physiology Testing
- •2 Conclusion
- •References
- •4 Unconventional Insights in the Pathogenesis and Etiology of Fistulas in the Perianal Region
- •1 Introduction
- •1.1 Etiology
- •1.2 Risk Factors for Development of Perianal Fistula
- •1.3 Risk Factors due to the Type of Perianal Fistula
- •1.4 Treatment-Related Risk Factors for Failure
- •1.5 Preliminary Conclusions
- •2.1 Anatomy of the Anal Canal
- •2.2 Histology of the Anal Canal
- •2.3 Histopathologic Concepts of Perianal Fistulas
- •3.1 Old Stories, New Histopathological Concepts?
- •3.2 Old Stories, New Clinical Concepts?
- •3.2.1 Basic Concepts
- •3.3 Based on Previous Medical History
- •3.4 Aspect and Localization of the Fistula Opening
- •3.5 Phenotype 1
- •3.6 Phenotype 2
- •3.7 Phenotype 3
- •3.8 Phenotype 4
- •3.9 Phenotype 5
- •4 Discussion and Conclusions
- •5 Cross-References
- •References
- •5 From Abscess to Fistula
- •1 Anorectal Abscess
- •References
- •6 Classification of Anal Fistula and Abscess
- •1 Introduction
- •2 Purpose and Attributes of a Classification
- •3 Overview of Anal Fistula Classifications
- •4 Anal Fistula Classifications
- •4.1 Parks Classification
- •4.1.1 Strong Points
- •4.1.2 Weak Points
- •5.1 Strong Points
- •5.2 Weak Points
- •6 Garg Classification
- •6.6 Strong Points
- •6.7 Weak Points
- •7 Status of Extrasphincteric Fistulas
- •8 Evaluation of Existing Classifications on Long-Term Data
- •9 Conclusions
- •References
- •7 Clinical Assessment of Anal Cryptoglandular Abscess and Fistula
- •1 Introduction
- •2 Types of Clinical Evaluation
- •3 Diagnosis
- •4 Topographic Evaluation
- •4.1 The Cryptic Endoanal Primary Opening
- •4.2 The Secondary Opening or Openings
- •4.3 The Main Tract of the Fistula
- •4.4 Possible Purulent Collections
- •1.1 Physical Examination of the Anus and Rectum: General Principles
- •4.5 Possible Secondary Extensions
- •5 Conclusion
- •References
- •8 Clinical Assessment of Crohn Perianal Abscesses and Fistulas
- •1 Introduction
- •1.2 Inspection
- •1.3 Palpation
- •1.4 Endoscopy
- •2 Clinical Presentation
- •2.1 Skin Lesions
- •2.2 Fistulas
- •2.3 Abscesses
- •2.4 Diagnostic Workup
- •2.4.1 General Principles
- •2.5 US
- •2.6 Effectiveness and Sensitivity
- •2.6.1 Endoscopy
- •2.7 MRI
- •2.7.1 CT Scan
- •2.7.2 Fistulography
- •2.8 Diagnostic Follow-up
- •References
- •9 Anorectal Physiology Assessment in Patients with Anal Fistula: When Necessary
- •1 Introduction
- •2 Anorectal Physiology Assessment
- •2.1 Anamnesis
- •2.2 Physical Examination
- •2.3 Anorectal Manometry
- •2.3.1 Equipment
- •2.3.2 Manometry Systems
- •2.4 Neurophysiologic Tests
- •2.4.1 Electromyography
- •2.4.2 Nerve Conduction Studies
- •2.5 Endoanal Ultrasound
- •2.6 Role of Anorectal Physiology Patterns in the Decision-Making
- •3 Discussion
- •References
- •1 Introduction
- •2 Anal Anatomy
- •3 Classification of Fistulas
- •4 EAUS Imaging
- •4.1 Probes EAUS
- •4.2 Performing EAUS
- •4.3 EUS in Perianal Fistulas
- •4.4 Adding Hydrogen Peroxide (H2O2)
- •4.5 Cryptoglandular Fistulas
- •5 Comparison with Other Diagnostic Modalities
- •5.1 Comparison with Surgery
- •5.2 Comparison with MRI
- •5.3 Perineal Ultrasound
- •6 Conclusion and Recommendation
- •References
- •1 Introduction
- •2 Imaging
- •2.1 Conventional Contrast Material-Enhanced Fistulography
- •2.2 CT
- •2.3 Magnetic Resonance Imaging
- •2.3.1 Anatomy MRI
- •2.3.2 MRI Technique (Coils, Volume, and Sequences) and Findings
- •2.3.3 MRI Reconstruction Techniques and Fistulography MRI
- •2.3.4 Internal and Cutaneous Opening
- •2.3.5 Classifications of Perianal Fistulas and Abscesses
- •2.3.6 Deep Posterior Anal Fistulas and Abscess
- •2.3.7 MRI Report
- •2.3.9 MR Role in the Evaluation of the Crypto-Glandular Fistulas
- •3 Conclusion
- •4 Cross-References
- •References
- •1 Introduction
- •2 Clinical Presentation
- •3 Utility and Limitations of Endoanal Ultrasound
- •4 Conclusion
- •5 Cross-References
- •References
- •1 Introduction
- •2 Imaging
- •3 Diagnosis
- •4 MRI Technique
- •5 Disease Monitoring
- •6 Future Directions
- •7 Conclusion
- •8 Cross-References
- •References
- •14 Future Perspectives in the Diagnosis of Anal Fistula and Abscess
- •1 Introduction
- •2 Assessment of Abscess and Anal Fistula
- •3 Abscess
- •3.1 Computed Tomography (CT)
- •3.2 Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI)
- •3.3 Endoanal Ultrasound
- •3.4 Transperineal Ultrasonography (TP-US)
- •4 Anal Fistula
- •4.1 Imaging
- •4.1.1 Endoanal Ultrasound
- •4.1.2 Magnetic Resonance Imaging
- •5 Conclusion
- •6 Cross-References
- •References
- •15 How to Drain an Abscess
- •1 Introduction
- •2 Epidemiology and Etiology
- •3 Classification
- •4 Clinical Manifestations and Diagnosis
- •5 Management
- •7 Wound Dressing
- •8 Microbiology and Antibiotics
- •9 General Postoperative Management
- •10 Conclusion
- •11 Cross-References
- •References
- •16 The Seton in Anal Fistula Management
- •1 Introduction
- •2 2500 Years of Setons
- •3 To Put or Not to Put
- •4 To Cut or Not to Cut
- •5 What Kind of Seton to Use?
- •7 Seton 2.0: New Perspectives
- •8 Uncomfortable Questions (How to Do It)
- •9 What Patients Should Know
- •10 Conclusions: Seton in Guidelines
- •References
- •17 Fistulotomy
- •1 Introduction
- •2 Indications
- •3 Fistulotomy: Standard Technique
- •4 Other Fistulotomy Techniques
- •4.1 Addition of Loose Seton
- •4.2 Slow Dissection of the Sphincter: Cutting Seton
- •4.3 Addition of Marsupialization
- •5 Fistulotomy with Immediate Primary Sphincteroplasty (FIPS)
- •7 Postoperative Care
- •8 Complications and Recurrence Rate
- •9 Discussion
- •10 Conclusion
- •References
- •18 Fistulectomy
- •1 Introduction
- •2 Preoperative Evaluation
- •2.1 Patient Selection
- •2.2 Imaging
- •2.3 Physiologic Testing
- •2.4 Endoscopic Examination
- •3 Technique
- •3.1 Patient Preparation
- •3.2 Patient Positioning
- •3.2.1 Technical Steps
- •4 Postoperative Care
- •5 Results
- •5.1 Fistulectomy
- •6 Fistulectomy with Sphincter Reconstruction
- •7 Conclusions
- •References
- •19 Utility of Adding Sphincter Reconstruction to Fistulotomy/Fistulectomy
- •1 Introduction
- •2 General Classification
- •3 Preoperative Preparation
- •4 Surgical Technique Step by Step
- •5 Results
- •6 Conclusion
- •7 Cross-References
- •References
- •20 Utility of Marsupialization Following Anal Fistula Surgery
- •1 Introduction
- •2 Marsupialization
- •3 Clinical Evidence
- •4 Conclusion
- •References
- •21 Transanal Advancement Flap Repair
- •1 Introduction
- •2 Nomenclature
- •3 Effectiveness of the Technique
- •4 Effectiveness of Repeat Procedures
- •5 Impact on Fecal Continence
- •6 Severity of Incontinence
- •7 Perioperative Care
- •7.1 Bowel Preparation
- •7.2 Antibiotic Prophylaxis
- •7.3 Prolonged Antibiotic Therapy
- •7.4 Type of Anesthesia
- •7.5 Immobilization
- •7.6 Bowel Confinement
- •7.7 Stool Softeners
- •7.8 Position
- •8 Aspects of Surgical Technique
- •8.1 Preoperative Care
- •8.2 Step 1
- •8.3 Step 2
- •8.4 Step 3
- •8.5 Step 4
- •8.6 Step 5
- •8.7 Postoperative Care
- •8.8 Types of Flap
- •8.9 Shape of Flap
- •8.10 Thickness of Flap
- •8.11 Addition of Accessory Techniques
- •9 Necessity of Preoperative Imaging
- •10 Factors Contributing to Successful Healing
- •10.1 Fistula-Related Factors
- •10.2 Patient-Related Factors
- •10.3 Influence of Covering Ostomy
- •10.4 Impact of the Use of Draining Setons
- •11 Conclusion
- •References
- •22 Dermal Flap Anoplasty for Trans-sphincteric Anal Fistula
- •1 Rationale
- •2 Technique
- •3 Other Dermal Flaps
- •4 Discussion
- •5 Cross-References
- •References
- •23 (LIFT) Ligation of Intersphincteric Fistula Tract
- •References
- •24 Anal Fistula: Glue and Paste Injection
- •1 Introduction
- •2 Fibrin Glue
- •3 Collagen Paste
- •4 Conclusion
- •5 Cross-References
- •References
- •25 VAAFT
- •1 Introduction
- •1.1 VAAFT Story
- •2 Surgical Equipment and Accessories
- •3 VAAFT Indications
- •3.1 Preoperative Assessment
- •4 VAAFT Procedure
- •4.1 Diagnostic Phase (Fistuloscopy)
- •4.2 Operative Phase
- •5 Closure of the Internal Opening
- •5.1 Use of a Linear or Semicircular Stapler
- •5.2 Advancement Flap
- •5.3 Use of a Bioabsorbable Mesh (Xenograft)
- •5.4 Autologous Dermis Graft
- •5.4.1 VAAFT Associated to the LIFT Procedure
- •5.5 Postoperative Management
- •6 Discussion
- •7 Conclusions
- •References
- •26 The Laser Treatment of Anal Fistulas
- •1 Introduction
- •1.1 Literature Review
- •1.3 Diagnosis and Treatment of Complex Anal Fistulas
- •2 Materials and Methods
- •3 Conclusion
- •References
- •27 Treatment by Over-the-Scope-Clip
- •1 Introduction
- •2 Technical Background
- •3 Surgical Application
- •4 Principle of Action
- •5 Clinical Data
- •References
- •28 Stem Cells in Cryptoglandular Anal Fistulas
- •1 Introduction
- •2 History of a Novel Approach
- •2.1 Mesenchymal Stem Cells
- •2.2 Adipose Tissue: The Ideal MSCs Source
- •2.3 Adipose Tissue Graft
- •2.3.1 Lipogems
- •3 Results
- •3.1 Literature Review
- •3.2 Personal Experience
- •4 Discussion and Conclusion
- •References
- •1 Introduction
- •2 Perianal and Rectovaginal Fistulas
- •2.1 Epidemiology and Diagnosis
- •2.2 Classification
- •2.3 Treatment Modalities
- •3 Flap Reconstruction
- •3.1 Overview and Considerations for Flap Reconstruction
- •4 Gracilis Interposition Flap
- •4.1 Background and Indications
- •4.2 Operative Technique
- •4.3 Results/Complications
- •5 Martius Interposition Flap
- •5.1 History and Indications
- •5.2 Surgical Technique
- •5.3 Results/Complications
- •6 Gluteal Muscle Interposition Flap
- •6.1 History and Indications
- •6.2 Surgical Technique
- •6.3 Results/Complications
- •7 Conclusion
- •References
- •30 Quality of Life Following Anal Fistula Treatment
- •1 Introduction
- •2 Quality of Life with an Anal Fistula
- •2.1 Cryptoglandular Fistulas
- •2.3 Conclusion
- •3 Quality of Life with a Seton and a Fistula

386 K. E. Matzel and B. Bittorf
and the partial healing rate (no suppurative discharge or staining from the external
opening, but opening not fully epithelialized and/or multiple external fistula openings were present before treatment and at least one (but not all) fistula opening closed
without discharge at follow-up) 22.6% versus 16.7%. Follow-up assessments were
obtained at 1 week and 3, 6, and 12 months. Deterioration of continence function
was not observed (de la Portilla et al. 2019).
A randomized single-blinded clinical trial studied the safety and efficacy of ASCs
plus fibrin glue for treatment of cryptoglandular fistulae. After fistula track preparation (debridement and closure of the inner fistula opening), 23 patients received
100 million ASCs plus intralesional fibrin glue and 21 patients intralesional fibrin
glue installation alone (Garcia-Arranz et al. 2020). At 16 weeks’ follow-up, the
healing rate (complete reepithelialization of the external fistual opening/s) was
30.4% with ACS and 42.8% in with fibrin glue alone. Respective numbers were
55.0% and 63.1% at 52 weeks, 50.0% and 26.3% at 2 years (P ¼ 0.129). Continence
impairment was not observed.
Various attempts have been made to develop recommendations and guidelines. In
2015, the consensus statements of the Italian Society of Colorectal Surgery (SICC R)
on the use of fibrin glue found it to be well tolerated with low morbidity. The
reported recurrence rates differ widely; in two randomized controlled trials, the
healing rates are 40–50%; the absence of sepsis in observational studies is only
14% and with longer follow-up an increasing incidence of recurrence. SICCR stated
that the use of biologically derived products has no statistically significant advantage
over traditional surgical treatment (Amato et al. 2015).
Based on the existing evidence (Level 1b), in 2017 the German S3 guidelines
concluded that the initial positive results with fibrin glue were not confirmed in either
long-term follow-up or more recent studies. The application may be indicated in
special cases, but the recommendation was graded B with a strong consensus
(Ommer et al. 2017).
The adoption rate of fibrin glue as a treatment for anal fistula was stable between
1999 and 2012. However, in the same time period, reports indicated a decline in the
success rate. Although the rates differed among reports from Europe. Australasia and
North America, all demonstrated a decline over time (Kontovounisios et al. 2016).
3 Collagen Paste
The use of collagen for the treatment of anal fistulae was introduced in 2010, and
available data are limited (Table 3 for reports with more than 25 patients (Hammond
et al. 2010; Bayrak and Altıntas 2018; Giordano et al. 2018; Schiano di Visconte
et al. 2019; Brunner et al. 2019; Maternini et al. 2020; Vollebregt et al. 2021)).
Studies are retrospective (N ¼ 3) and prospective (N ¼ 4), one multicenter. In one
randomized study, collagen implant is compared to collagen-Fibrin glue (Hammond
et al. 2010). In one study, equine collagen is used (Maternini et al. 2020). Fistula type
varies (Types I to IV); also in one study, the use of collagen paste in rectovaginal

24 Anal Fistula: Glue and Paste Injection 387
Follow-up
(months)
Impaired continence
(%)
Recurrence
(%)
n.a. 0 29 (4–43)
Healing
(%)
54 (7/13)B:80 (12/15)
13 (11–15)
post 0.55 (ns)
39 0 12
53.5
24 (1–25)
(53/99)
scale score pre 1.10;
post 1.13 (ns)
30 patients
12 in
24 patients
ns not significant
Crohn’s
Fistula
Table 3 Results of collagen paste installation in studies with 25 patients*
(%) Study design
II, III n.a. Prospective A:
type
2010 A:
Hammond
Study Year N
Collagen:13B:
(Hammond et al.
2010)
Collagen-
fibrin glue:
16
2018 31 I, II 0 Retrospective 77 23 FISI score pre 0.29,
Bayrak (Bayrak and
Altıntas 2018)
Multicenter
0 Retrospective 50 20 Continence grading
2018 100 I, II 0 Prospective
2019 46 II, III,
Giordano (Giordano
et al. 2018)
Schiano di Visconte
IV
(Schiano di Visconte
et al. 2019)
2019 30 II, RVF 40 Prospective 63 7 1/30 6in
Brunner (Brunner
et al. 2019)
2020 70 II 0 Prospective 79 21 0 12
Maternini
(equine collagen
[Salvecoll])
(Maternini et al.
2020)
2021 90 I, II 0 Retrospective 20 42 n.a. 30 (9–60)
Vollebregt
(Vollebregt et al.
2021)
aAdapted from references (Ommer et al. 2017; Vollebregt et al. 2021), n.a. not available, RVF rectovaginal fistula,

388 K. E. Matzel and B. Bittorf
fistula is described. In only one (Brunner et al. 2019) are patients with Crohn’s
disease described.
The technique is rather uniform. Key elements are the removal of detritus and
fistula tissue by debridement of the fistula tract and avoidance of protrusion of the
paste after application through the fistula openings. Repeated applications in case of
initial treatment failure are reported.
Overall, the five studies for collagen paste (porcine) application show highly
variable outcomes, with healing rates between 20% and 77%. Follow-up is between
6 and 30 months. Continence function – addressed in 4/5 studies – appears not to be
affected by the therapy.
In 2015, the consensus statements of the Italian Society of Colorectal Surgery
(SICCR) commented only based on the data of collagen implant versus coll agen
fibrin glue and the use of collagen suspension to augment rectal mucosal advancement flap and concluded that insufficient information does not allow any recommendation (Amato et al. 2015). In 2017, the German S3 guidelines (Ommer et al.
2017) found that, based on the sparse nature of the existing evidence, no recom-
mendation could be given (graded C with a strong consensus).
4 Conclusion
The appeals of sealant therapy for anal fistula are the relative ease of application,
the fact that anal sphincter lesions do not as a rule occur (thus lowering the risk
of post therapeutic fecal incontinence), and that the treatment interferes little with
potential further interventions. Existing evidence for the clinical effectiveness of
fistula closure with fibrin glue is low. Available information is heterogeneous
with regard to indication, outcome monitoring, and assessment. Study methods
vary widely. Randomized trials indicate that the clinical benefitislimited.
Regarding the use of collagen paste, data are fewer, more recent, and no more
encouraging.
In comparison with other sphincter-sparing treatments, such as flap procedures or
ligation of the intersphincteric fistula tract (Cheung et al. 2021), healing rates of
fibrin glue and collagen paste are less. Despite these limitations, the very low
invasiveness lends this therapeutic approach theoretic support, and it will most likely
still be considered before more invasive techniques. Future substances may result in
better outcomes. The initial, often enthusiastic, appreciation of therapies with limited
invasiveness reflects the challenges of anal fistula surgery and the fact that all of the
currently available treatment options have limitations.
5 Cross-References
▶ Classification of Anal Fistula and Abscess
▶ Fistulectomy
▶ Fistulotomy

24 Anal Fistula: Glue and Paste Injection 389
▶ (LIFT) Ligation of Intersphincteric Fistula Tract
▶ Utility of Adding Sphincter Reconstruction to Fistulotomy/Fistulectomy
References
Abel ME, Chiu YS, Russell TR et al (1993) Autologous fibrin glue in the treatment of rectovaginal
and complex fistulas. Dis Colon Rectum 36:447–449
Adams T, Yang J, Kondylis LA et al (2008) Long-term outlook after successful fibrin glue ablation
of cryptoglandular transsphincteric fistula-in-ano. Dis Colon Rectum 51:1488–1490
Altomare DF, Greco VJ, Tricomi N (2010) Seton or glue for trans-sphincteric anal fistulae: a
prospective randomized crossover clinical trial. Color Dis 13:82–86
Amato A, Bottini C, Nardi D et al (2015) Italian society of colorectal surgery. Evaluation and
management of perianal abscess and anal fistula: a consensus statement developed by the Italian
Society of Colorectal Surgery (SICCR). Tech Coloproctol 19:595–606
Barillari P, Basso L, Larcinese A et al (2006) Cyanoacrylate glue in the treatment of ano-rectal
fistulas. Int J Color Dis 21:791–794
Bayrak M, Altıntas Y (2018) Permacol™ collagen paste injection in anal fistula treatment: a
retrospective study with one-year follow-up. Adv Ther 35:1232–1238
Brunner M, Schneider I, Günther K et al (2019) Permacol™ collagen paste for cryptoglandular and
Crohn’s anal fistula. Tech Coloproctol 23:135–141
Cestaro G, De Rosa M, Gentile M (2014) Treatment of fistula in ano with fibrin glue: preliminary
results from a prospective study. Minerva Chir 69:225–228
Cheung XC, FaheyT AC, Rogers CR et al (2021) Surgical management of idiopathic perianal
fistulas: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Dig Surg 38:104–119
Cintron JR, Park JJ, Orsay CP et al (1999) Repair of fistulas-in-ano using autologous fibrin tissue
adhesive. Dis Colon Rectum 42:607–613
Cintron JR, Park JJ, Orsay CP et al (2000) Repair of fistulas-in-ano using fibrin adhesive: long-term
followup. Dis Colon Rectum 43:944–949
de la Portilla F (2008) Evaluation of the use of BioGlue in the treatment of high anal fistulas:
preliminary results of a pilot study: the author replies. Dis Colon Rectum 51:1156
de la Portilla F, Muñoz-Cruzado MVD, Maestre MVet al (2019) Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) versus
fibrin glue in cryptogenic fistula-in-ano: a phase III single-center, randomized, double-blind
trial. Int J Color Dis 34:1113–1119
de Oca J, Millan M, Jimenez A et al (2011) Long-term results of surgery plus fibrin sealant for anal
fistula. Color Dis 14:e12–
de Parades V, Far HS, Etienney I et al (2010) Seton drainage and fibrin glue injection for complex
anal fistulas. Color Dis 12:459–463
Ellis CN, Clark S (2006) Fibrin glue as an adjunct to flap repair of anal fistulas: a randomized,
controlled study. Dis Colon Rectum 49:1736–1740
Garcia-Arranz M, Garcia-Olmo D, Herreros MD et al (2020) Autologous adipose-derived stem cells
for the treatment of complex cryptoglandular perianal fistula: A randomized clinical trial with
long-term follow-up. Stem Cells Transl Med 9:295–301
Garcia-Olmo D, Herreros D, Pascual I et al (2009) Expanded adipose-derived stem cells for the
treatment of complex perianal fistula: a phase II clinical trial. Dis Colon Rectum 52:79–86
Giordano P, Sileri P, Buntzen S et al (2018) Final results of a European, multicentre, prospective,
observational study of Permacol™ collagen paste injection for the treatment of anal fistula.
Color Dis 20:243–251
Gisbertz SS, Sosef MN, Festen S et al (2005) Treatment of fistulas in ano with fibrin glue. Dig Surg
22:91–94
Hammond TM, Porrett T, Scott SM et al (2010) Management of idiopathic anal fistula using cross-
linked collagen: a prospective phase 1 study. Color Dis 13:94–104
Herreros MD, Garcia-Arranz M, Guadalajara H et al (2012) Autologous expanded adipose-derived
stem cells for the treatment of complex cryptoglandular perianal fistulas: a phase III randomized
e15

390 K. E. Matzel and B. Bittorf
clinical trial (FATT 1: Fistula Advanced Therapy Trial 1) and long- term evaluation. Dis Colon
Rectum 55:762–772
Hjortrup A, Moesgaard F, Kjaergard J (1991) Fibrin adhesive in the treatment of perianal fistulas.
Dis Colon Rectum 34:752–754
Jain SK, Kaza RCM, Pahwa M et al (2008) Role of cyanoacrylate in the management of low fistula
in ano: a prospective study. Int J Color Dis 23:255–358
Johnson EK, Gaw JU, Armstrong DN (2006) The comparison of fibrin glue and fistula plug
application efficacy of anal fistula plug vs. fibrin glue in closure of anorectal fistulas. Dis
Colon Rectum 49:371–376
Jurczak F, Laridon JY, Raggaitin P et al (2004) Biological fibrin used in anal fistulas: 31 patients.
Ann Chir 129:286–289
Kontovounisios C, Tekkis P, Tan E et al (2016) Adoption and success rates of perineal procedures
for fistula-in-ano: a systematic review. Color Dis 18:441–458
Lindsey I, Smilgin-Humphreys MM, Cunningham C et al (2002) A randomized, controlled trial of
fibrin glue vs. conventional treatment for anal fistula. Dis Colon Rectum 45:1608–1615
Maralcan G, Baskonus I, Aybasti N et al (2006) The use of fibrin glue in the treatment of fistula-in-
ano: a prospective study. Surg Today 36:166–170
Maralcan G, Baskonus I, Gökalp A et al (2011) Long-term results in the treatment of fistula-in-ano
with fibrin glue: a prospective study. J Korean Surg Soc 81:169–175
Maternini M, Guttadauro A, Mascagni D et al (2020) Non cross-linked equine collagen (Salvecoll-
E gel) for treatment of complex ano-rectal fistula. Asian J Surg 43:401–404
Mishra A, Shah S, Nar A et al (2013) The role of fibrin glue in the treatment of high and low fistulas
in ano. J Clin Diagn Res 7:876–879
Ommer A, Herold A, Berg E (2017) German S3 guidelines: anal abscess and fistula (second revised
version). Langenbeck’s Arch Surg 402:191–201
Park JJ, Cintron JR, Orsay CP et al (2000) Repair of chronic anorectal fistulae using commercial
fibrin sealant. Arch Surg 135:166–169
Patrlj L, Kocman B, Martinac M et al (2000) Fibrin glue-antibiotic mixture in the treatment of anal
fistulae: experience with 69 cases. Dig Surg 17:77–80
Queralto M, Portier G, Bonnaud G et al (2010) Efficacy of synthetic glue treatment of high
crypoglandular fistula-in-ano. Gastroenterol Clin Biol 34:477–482
Schiano di Visconte M, Braini A, Moras L et al (2019) Permacol collagen paste injection for
treatment of complex cryptoglandular anal fistulas: an observational cohort study with a 2-year
follow-up. Surg Innov 26:168–179
Sentovich SM (2001) Fibrin glue for all anal fistulas. J Gastrointest Surg 5:158–161
Singer M, Cintron J, Neldson R et al (2005) Treatment of fistulas-in-ano with fibrin sealant in
combination with intra-adhesive antibiotics and/or surgical closure of the internal fistula open-
ing. Dis Colon Rectum 48:799–808
Tyler KM, Aarons CB, Sentovich SM (2007) Successful sphincter-sparing surgery for all anal
fistulas. Dis Colon Rectum 50:1535–1539
van der Hagen SJ, Baeten CG, Soeters PB et al (2011) Staged mucosal advancement flap versus
staged fibrin sealant in the treatment of complex perianal fistulas. Gastroenterol Res
Pract:186350
van Koperen PJ, Wind J, Bemelman WA et al (2008) Fibrin glue and transanal rectal advancement
flap for high transsphincteric perianal fistulas; is there any advantage? Int J Color Dis 23:
697–701
Vollebregt PF, Vander Mijnsbrugge GJ, Molenaar CBH et al (2021) Efficacy of Permacol injection
for perianal fistulas in a tertiary referral population: poor outcome in patients with complex
fistulas. Color Dis 23:2119–2126
Witte ME, Klaase JM, Gerritsen JJ et al (2007) Fibrin glue treatment for simple and complex anal
fistulas. Hepato-Gastroenterology 54:1071–1073
Yeung JMC, Simpson JA, Tang S-W et al (2010) Fibrin glue for the treatment of fistulae in ano – a
method worth sticking to? Color Dis 12:363–366

VAAFT
25
Video-Assisted Anal Fistula Treatment
Piercarlo Meinero
Contents
1 Introduction . ............... .................................................................. 392
1.1 VAAFT Story . . . .................................................................. ..... 392
1.2 The “Fistuloscope” and the “Fistuloscopy” .......................................... 393
2 Surgical Equipment and Accessories ....................................................... 393
3 VAAFT Indications .......................................................................... 395
3.1 Preoperative Assessment .............................................................. 396
4 VAAFT Procedure ........................................................................... 396
4.1 Diagnostic Phase (Fistuloscopy) .......................... ............................ 397
4.2 Operative Phase ... . . . . ...... . . . . ....... . . . . ...... . . . . . ....... . . . . ...... . . . . ....... . . . . 401
5 Closure of the Internal Opening ............................................................ 403
5.1 Use of a Linear or Semicircular Stapler .............................................. 403
5.2 Advancement Flap .................................................................... 404
5.3 Use of a Bioabsorbable Mesh (Xenograft) ... ........................................ 405
5.4 Autologous Dermis Graft ................ ............................. ................ 406
5.5 Postoperative Management ........................................................... 407
6 Discussion . ..... . . . . ...... . . . . ....... . . . ..... . . . . . ...... . . . . ...... . . . . ...... . . . . ...... . . . . ... 408
7 Conclusions .................................................................................. 409
References ............................ ............................................... ............ 411
Abstract
Video-assisted anal fistula treatment (VAAFT) is a fairly new sphincter-saving
and minimally invasive surgical technique to treat complex anal fistulas and their
recurrences. The main characteristic of the procedure is the direct vision which
differentiates it from any other surgical technique. VAAFT makes use of a
particular optical device named “Meinero’s Fistuloscope” (manufactured by
Karl Storz SE & Co. Kg. – Tuttlingen Germany) which allows to treat the anal
fistula from the inside. VAAFT has two phases: diagnostic and operative. Aims of
P. Meinero (*)
Minimally-Invasive Proctology Center, Montallegro Clinic, Genoa, Italy
“Beata Vergine” Hospital, Mendrisio, Switzerland
© 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_27
391

392 P. Meinero
the first phase is to correctly identify the fistula main tract and the fistula internal
opening, not forgetting any secondary tracts or abscess cavities, very common
condition in complex cases. During the operative phase, all fistula tracts and any
possible abscess cavities are destroyed with a monopolar electrode passing
through the operative channel of the fistuloscope, always visually. The necrotic
material is removed with an endo-brush, here too, under direct vision. This
technique has many advantages compared to the other techniques: treating the
fistula under vision and from the inside, the risk to damage the sphincter apparatus is nil, no significant wounds are made on the perianal area, the patient
doesn’t need painful dressings, and can manage his postoperative period at home.
And more, the patient returns to work after a few days. However, the closure of
the internal opening remains a weakness. This cannot be done with the
fistuloscope. So, in this chapter, I’m showing at least four surgical methods to
do it.
1 Introduction
Wanting to play the devil role, I would say that a big trouble clearly arises from the
literature. Speaking about the anal fistula surgical treatment, we can all see the wide
difference between the “real life” and reported rates of success. We can say that the
percentage of success after traditional surgery is very high. But if the reported
percentage of success is really true, why are we struggling to find other surgical
methods to treat anal fistulas?
And even more, it seems there are no consensus on assessment of surgical
outcomes, and there is a poor surgeon assessment after the estimated wound healing.
And more, we can find only a few thorough studies focused on the patient assessment, and clearly arise that there is no a precise definition about the time to anal
fistula recurrence.
First of all, we have to assess the risk of incontinence above all in case of patient
underwent surgery many times. Most of the times, we have to consider the preexisting sphincter damage, scarring in the anal canal and the amount of sphincter
preserved. But not less important is the patient’s frustration, so it is mandatory to
consider his quality of life. To make the headache even worse, we are realizing that
postoperative incontinence probably occurs more often than we realize, and patients
don’t like it. Postoperative incontinence is a well-known and feared complication of
anal surgery. So, we think it is very important to know many surgical techniques and
select all patients in order to decide the best method for each of them.
1.1 VAAFT Story
The VAAFT history starts on February 2006 at the Gaslini Children’s Institute in
Genova. Dottor Meinero saw a pediatric urologist who was performing a cystoscopy

25 VAAFT 393
on a little patient, 6 years old, by a pediatric cystoscope. So, he had the idea to
insert the same device into a complex anal fistula. Three weeks later, he used the
same pediatric cystoscope on a patient underwent surgery eight times by traditional
techniques. His fistula was considered to be so much complex that the most of
surgeons proposed him to do an ostomy. As he was 43, the patient refused that and
any other traditional procedures. So, he asked Doctor Meinero to propose him any
other surgical option. In the next 5 years, many patients underwent VAAFT
procedure. The first paper was published on techniques in coloproctology in
October 2011. According to Doctor Meinero, Karl Storz SE & Co.KG
manufactured the “Fistuloscope.”
1.2 The “Fistuloscope” and the “Fistuloscopy”
What characterizes the VAAFT procedure are two fundamental concepts: the “ direct
vision” and the “endo-treatment.” Undoubtedly, it deals with new concepts never
adopted before. The first aim is to be allowed to know the whole “fistula tree,”
branches and abscess cavities included, already at the beginning of the procedure.
We could say “ a fistula anatomy confirmation,” above all in the case of complex
anal fistula or recurrences. In other words, we perform a “ Fistuloscopy.” But also
the “ endo-treatment” could be consider a winning choice. After all, many surgical
procedures are now performed endoscopically, and it is reasonable translating this
idea in the anal fistula field. Compared with other techniques, VAAFT is the only
procedure that allows intraoperative visualization of the entire fistula tract, possible secondary tracts, and the internal fistula opening from within the tract (Zelić
et al., 2020). Albert Einstein said “You will never solve t he problem with the
mindsetthatcreatedit.” Exactly what we have to do is to view this subject from
a different prospective.
2 Surgical Equipment and Accessories
The VAAFT kit includes the fiberoptic fistuloscope (Fig.1a), a monopolar electrode
(Fig.1b), a thin endo-brush (Fig.1c), an optical forceps (Fig.1d), and a sealing cap
“endoscopic seal.” Any video tower can be used thanks to a universal adapter.
The fistuloscope (Fig. 2) has an 8
3.3 4.7 mm. The operative sheath is 18 cm long, but it reduces his length to 14 cm
when the handle is inserted. The fistuloscope is rigid and not flexible, in order to
better win the surrounding tissue resistance during the maneuvers of the fistuloscopy.
When the fistula is longer, the handle can be removed in order to increase the
sheath length. The handle also has a special mechanism which allows it to be turned
180
, a very important function in case it needs to be tangential to the surgical
surface. Moreover, the handle also allows to provide the required force to straighten
the fistula tract when much curved. The fistuloscope is connected first to a cold light
fountain (Karl Storz Power Led 300) with a fiberoptic light cable. It has two opposite
angled eyepiece and an outer diameter of

394 P. Meinero
Fig. 1 The VAAFT kit: the
fiberoptic fistuloscope (a),
monopolar electrode (b), the
endo-brush (c), and the
forceps (d) (Karl Storz
Tuttlingen, Germany)
Fig. 2 The fistuloscope
luer stopcocks, one of which is connected by a sterile tube to a 3000 ml bag of 1%
glycine and mannitol solution, depending on the external fistula opening position.
The 1% glycine and mannitol solution allows a good irrigation and widening of the
fistula, and a good transmission of the current during cauterization of the fistula
internal wall. The fistuloscope has two channels, optic and operative. Optic fibers are
set out into the optic channel, while through the operative channel pass both the
irrigation solution and the surgical devices (obturator, forceps, electrode, and endobrush). The obturator is inserted into the operative channel at the beginning of
VAAFT procedure. It appears as a crescent shape on the lower part of the screen
and must be kept in this position (6 o’clock) in order to ensure a correct orientation
during the internal fistula “exploration” (diagnostic phase). The obturator is removed
at the end of the diagnostic phase.
The monopolar electrode is 7 Fr. And 53 cm long. It is inserted into the
operative channel at the beginning of the operative phase, once the obturator is

25 VAAFT 395
removed. It is connected to a high-frequency surgical unit. The coagulation power is
variable depending of the fistula characteristics.
The endo-brush, passing through the operative channel, takes to clean the
internal fistula wall when the cauterization is completed. Always visually, it removes
the necrotic material.
The optical forceps, also passing through the fistuloscope, allows removing
larger pieces of tissue and, in the meantime, improve the fistula enlargement by
progressively open his branches.
The sealing cap is very important. At the end of the diagnostic phase, the
obturator is removed, and the sealing cap inserted in the back of the fistuloscope.
This doesn’t allow the backfl ow of the irrigation solution when the accessory devices
are put or removed during the operative phase.
3 VAAFT Indications
VAAFT is indicated for treating complex anal fistulas and their recurrences (Fig. 3).
Paradoxically, the longer the fistula is, the easier it is to perform VAAFT
procedure. In many cases, VAAFT represents an extreme surgical option when any
other surgical techniques have failed. VAAFT is also a valid alternative in the
treatment of anal fistula in the pediatric population (Pini Prato et al., 2016), and in
complex anal fistulas in patients suffering from Crohn’s disease. In this respect, some
studies demonstrate the feasibility, safety, and importantly an improvement in
patient-reported outcomes in a series of patients undergoing VAAFT for complex
Crohn’s anal fistula. VAAFT reduces the main symptoms (pain and discharge) in
patients with complex refractory anal fistulas (Adegbola et al., 2018). As mentioned
above, VAAFT is not indicated for treating simple fistulas. But Indru Khubchandani
Fig. 3 A schematic
representation of a transsphincteric anal fistula
Соседние файлы в папке Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана
