Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2008 Jul;10(6):547-52.
doi: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2007.01388.x. Epub 2007 Sep 13.

Comparison of surgical vs chemical sphincterotomy using botulinum toxin for the treatment of chronic anal fissure: a meta-analysis

Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Comparison of surgical vs chemical sphincterotomy using botulinum toxin for the treatment of chronic anal fissure: a meta-analysis

M S Sajid et al. Colorectal Dis. 2008 Jul.

Abstract

Objective: To analyse systematically prospective randomized controlled trials dealing with the effectiveness of surgical sphincterotomy (SS) vs chemical sphincterotomy (CS) using botulinum toxin for the management of chronic anal fissure (CAF).

Method: A systematic review of the literature was undertaken. Prospective randomized controlled trials on the effectiveness of SS vs CS using botulinum toxin were selected and analysed to generate the summative outcome.

Results: Four prospective randomized controlled trials dealing with SS vs CS using botulinum injection, which included 279 CAF patients, were analysed. Based on the random effects model, there was a higher complication rate [Risk ratio (RR) 14.54 (-9.84, -38.9) 95% CI, df = 2, P < 0.0163] and a higher risk of transient faecal incontinence [RR 6.39 (-2.37, -15.1) 95% CI, df = 3, P < 0.0001] in the SS group than in the CS group. However, there was significant heterogeneity among the trials (Q = 8 408 891, P < 0.0001), indicating a wide confidence interval range; thus, the inferiority of SS could not be shown. SS had a significantly higher healing rate [RR 1.63, (1.34-1.91) 95% CI, df = 3, P < 0.0110] and a significantly lower recurrence rate [RR 0.35 (0.33-0.38) 95% CI, df = 3, P < 0.0221] than CS.

Conclusion: Both CS and SS are comparable in the management of CAF. There are no differences in the complication rates and incontinence rates between the two procedures. SS has a higher healing rate and a lower recurrence rate than CS. As long as the patient is willing to accept a negligible risk of transient faecal incontinence, SS should be the first-line treatment for CAF.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

Similar articles

Cited by

Substances

LinkOut - more resources