Sphincter repair procedures may be favored in the treatment of obstetrical recto-vaginal fistula: a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis.
A Venara, H Houlet, E Poupard, M André, P E Bouet, J Gillet, J F Hamel
{"title":"Sphincter repair procedures may be favored in the treatment of obstetrical recto-vaginal fistula: a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis.","authors":"A Venara, H Houlet, E Poupard, M André, P E Bouet, J Gillet, J F Hamel","doi":"10.1007/s10151-025-03133-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The management of obstetric rectovaginal fistula (RVF) is challenging for the surgeon. The best surgical procedure to repair RVFs, specifically after obstetric anal sphincter injury, has not been extensively studied. The objective was to compare the success of the different procedures performed to repair obstetric RVF.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The literature search was carried out on PubMed<sup>®</sup> and Web of Science<sup>®</sup> from database inception until 31 December 2022. Selection criteria were: (1) patients with a diagnosis of obstetric-related RVF; (2) patients treated surgically with no restriction concerning the considered surgery; (3) clinical trials or epidemiological studies. Meta-analysis was conducted considering the network meta-analysis framework to allow studying the relative value of each treatment mentioned in the selected articles.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The quantitative synthesis included 32 studies (18 retrospective and 14 prospective) accounting for 595 patients. The quality of these studies was low because of the lack of prospective randomization. Nineteen procedure types were described and assessed. Most patients (n = 180) underwent endorectal advancement flap (ERAF) followed by excision and layered closure (ELC) (n = 213) and Musset procedure (n = 65). A diverting stoma was performed in 66/132 patients. Only 13 studies reported the functional results of the procedure. In the meta-analysis, the Musset procedure (OR = 4.29; 95% CI: 1.18-16.14), transvaginal ELC (OR = 11.84; 95% CI: 2.18-91.80) and transperineal ELC (OR = 3.56; 95% CI: 1.26-10) significantly improved the anatomical results compared to ERAF.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A further randomized controlled trial in the literature assessing ERAF and sphincteroplasty to compare the anatomical results, functional results and morbidity of this treatment is needed.</p><p><strong>Registration: </strong>PROSPERO CRD42023447875.</p>","PeriodicalId":51192,"journal":{"name":"Techniques in Coloproctology","volume":"29 1","pages":"95"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Techniques in Coloproctology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-025-03133-3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: The management of obstetric rectovaginal fistula (RVF) is challenging for the surgeon. The best surgical procedure to repair RVFs, specifically after obstetric anal sphincter injury, has not been extensively studied. The objective was to compare the success of the different procedures performed to repair obstetric RVF.
Methods: The literature search was carried out on PubMed® and Web of Science® from database inception until 31 December 2022. Selection criteria were: (1) patients with a diagnosis of obstetric-related RVF; (2) patients treated surgically with no restriction concerning the considered surgery; (3) clinical trials or epidemiological studies. Meta-analysis was conducted considering the network meta-analysis framework to allow studying the relative value of each treatment mentioned in the selected articles.
Results: The quantitative synthesis included 32 studies (18 retrospective and 14 prospective) accounting for 595 patients. The quality of these studies was low because of the lack of prospective randomization. Nineteen procedure types were described and assessed. Most patients (n = 180) underwent endorectal advancement flap (ERAF) followed by excision and layered closure (ELC) (n = 213) and Musset procedure (n = 65). A diverting stoma was performed in 66/132 patients. Only 13 studies reported the functional results of the procedure. In the meta-analysis, the Musset procedure (OR = 4.29; 95% CI: 1.18-16.14), transvaginal ELC (OR = 11.84; 95% CI: 2.18-91.80) and transperineal ELC (OR = 3.56; 95% CI: 1.26-10) significantly improved the anatomical results compared to ERAF.
Conclusions: A further randomized controlled trial in the literature assessing ERAF and sphincteroplasty to compare the anatomical results, functional results and morbidity of this treatment is needed.
期刊介绍：
Techniques in Coloproctology is an international journal fully devoted to diagnostic and operative procedures carried out in the management of colorectal diseases. Imaging, clinical physiology, laparoscopy, open abdominal surgery and proctoperineology are the main topics covered by the journal. Reviews, original articles, technical notes and short communications with many detailed illustrations render this publication indispensable for coloproctologists and related specialists. Both surgeons and gastroenterologists are represented on the distinguished Editorial Board, together with pathologists, radiologists and basic scientists from all over the world. The journal is strongly recommended to those who wish to be updated on recent developments in the field, and improve the standards of their work.
Manuscripts submitted for publication must contain a statement to the effect that all human studies have been reviewed by the appropriate ethics committee and have therefore been performed in accordance with the ethical standards laid down in an appropriate version of the 1965 Declaration of Helsinki. It should also be stated clearly in the text that all persons gave their informed consent prior to their inclusion in the study. Details that might disclose the identity of the subjects under study should be omitted. Reports of animal experiments must state that the Principles of Laboratory Animal Care (NIH publication no. 86-23 revised 1985) were followed as were applicable national laws (e.g. the current version of the German Law on the Protection of Animals). The Editor-in-Chief reserves the right to reject manuscripts that do not comply with the above-mentioned requirements. Authors will be held responsible for false statements or for failure to fulfill such requirements.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
