激光瘘管闭合术后疼痛与括约肌间瘘管结扎术后疼痛:一项前瞻性双盲随机对照试验。

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Q2 SURGERY
World Journal of Surgery Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-06 DOI:10.1002/wjs.12242
Jolynn Qian Lin Low, Retnagowri Rajandram, Mohamed Rezal Abdul Aziz, April Camilla Roslani
{"title":"激光瘘管闭合术后疼痛与括约肌间瘘管结扎术后疼痛:一项前瞻性双盲随机对照试验。","authors":"Jolynn Qian Lin Low, Retnagowri Rajandram, Mohamed Rezal Abdul Aziz, April Camilla Roslani","doi":"10.1002/wjs.12242","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Prior studies focus primarily on surgical outcomes of anal fistula treatment, such as healing rates, rather than patient-reported outcomes, such as postoperative pain, which could influence surgical choice.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare pain scores at 6 and 24 h postoperatively between laser closure and ligation of the intersphincteric tract for anal fistula.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Prospective, double-blinded randomized controlled trial.</p><p><strong>Settings: </strong>A quaternary hospital in Malaysia.</p><p><strong>Patients: </strong>Patients aged 18-75 years with high transsphincteric fistulas.</p><p><strong>Intervention: </strong>Fistula laser closure versus ligation of the fistula tract (LIFT) treatment.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Pain scores, continence, quality of life (QOL), operative time, and treatment failure were compared using chi-square, Fisher's exact test, student t-test, or Mann-Whitney with p < 0.05 denoting statistical significance.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fifty-six patients were recruited (laser, n = 28, LIFT, n = 28). Median pain scores for laser versus LIFT at 6 h postoperatively were 1.0 versus 2.0 (Rest, p = 0.213) and 3.0 versus 4.0 (Movement, p = 0.448), respectively. At 24 h, this reduced to 2.5 in both arms at rest (p = 0.842) but increased to 4.8 versus 3.5 on movement (p = 0.383). Median operative time for laser was significantly shorter (32.5 min) than LIFT (p < 0.001). Laser treated patients trended toward quicker return to work (10.5 vs. 14.0, p = 0.181) but treatment failure was similar (54% vs. 50%, p = 0.71). No patients developed postoperative incontinence. Mean SF-36 scores increased from baseline (67.1 ± 17.0; 95% CI 63.6-82.4 vs. 71.3 ± 11.4; 95% CI 64.0-75.0) to 6 months postoperatively (77.7 ± 21.0; 95% CI 57.0-80.3 vs. 74.0 ± 14.3; 95% CI 67.6-81.4) regardless of the type of surgery (P > 0.05).</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Patients with prior fistula surgery (approximately 20%) led to heterogeneity. The total laser energy delivered varied depending on fistula anatomy.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Laser fistula closure is an alternative to LIFT, with similar postoperative pain and shorter operative time despite more complex fistula anatomy in the laser arm, with a greater improvement in QOL.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT06212739.</p>","PeriodicalId":23926,"journal":{"name":"World Journal of Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Postoperative pain following laser fistula closure versus ligation of the intersphincteric fistula tract: A prospective double-blinded randomized controlled trial.\",\"authors\":\"Jolynn Qian Lin Low, Retnagowri Rajandram, Mohamed Rezal Abdul Aziz, April Camilla Roslani\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/wjs.12242\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Prior studies focus primarily on surgical outcomes of anal fistula treatment, such as healing rates, rather than patient-reported outcomes, such as postoperative pain, which could influence surgical choice.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare pain scores at 6 and 24 h postoperatively between laser closure and ligation of the intersphincteric tract for anal fistula.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Prospective, double-blinded randomized controlled trial.</p><p><strong>Settings: </strong>A quaternary hospital in Malaysia.</p><p><strong>Patients: </strong>Patients aged 18-75 years with high transsphincteric fistulas.</p><p><strong>Intervention: </strong>Fistula laser closure versus ligation of the fistula tract (LIFT) treatment.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Pain scores, continence, quality of life (QOL), operative time, and treatment failure were compared using chi-square, Fisher's exact test, student t-test, or Mann-Whitney with p < 0.05 denoting statistical significance.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fifty-six patients were recruited (laser, n = 28, LIFT, n = 28). Median pain scores for laser versus LIFT at 6 h postoperatively were 1.0 versus 2.0 (Rest, p = 0.213) and 3.0 versus 4.0 (Movement, p = 0.448), respectively. At 24 h, this reduced to 2.5 in both arms at rest (p = 0.842) but increased to 4.8 versus 3.5 on movement (p = 0.383). Median operative time for laser was significantly shorter (32.5 min) than LIFT (p < 0.001). Laser treated patients trended toward quicker return to work (10.5 vs. 14.0, p = 0.181) but treatment failure was similar (54% vs. 50%, p = 0.71). No patients developed postoperative incontinence. Mean SF-36 scores increased from baseline (67.1 ± 17.0; 95% CI 63.6-82.4 vs. 71.3 ± 11.4; 95% CI 64.0-75.0) to 6 months postoperatively (77.7 ± 21.0; 95% CI 57.0-80.3 vs. 74.0 ± 14.3; 95% CI 67.6-81.4) regardless of the type of surgery (P > 0.05).</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Patients with prior fistula surgery (approximately 20%) led to heterogeneity. The total laser energy delivered varied depending on fistula anatomy.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Laser fistula closure is an alternative to LIFT, with similar postoperative pain and shorter operative time despite more complex fistula anatomy in the laser arm, with a greater improvement in QOL.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT06212739.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23926,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"World Journal of Surgery\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"World Journal of Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/wjs.12242\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/6/6 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Journal of Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/wjs.12242","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:之前的研究主要关注肛瘘治疗的手术结果,如愈合率,而不是患者报告的结果,如术后疼痛,这可能会影响手术选择:比较激光闭合术和括约肌间结扎术治疗肛瘘术后6小时和24小时的疼痛评分:设计:前瞻性双盲随机对照试验:设置:马来西亚一家四级医院:干预措施:瘘管激光闭合术与瘘管缝合术:瘘管激光闭合术与瘘管结扎术(LIFT)治疗:采用卡方检验(chi-square)、费雪精确检验(Fisher's exact test)、学生 t 检验(student t test)或曼-惠特尼(Mann-Whitney)检验(P)对疼痛评分、尿失禁、生活质量(QOL)、手术时间和治疗失败进行比较:共招募了 56 名患者(激光,28 人;LIFT,28 人)。术后 6 小时,激光和 LIFT 的中位疼痛评分分别为 1.0 对 2.0(休息,p = 0.213)和 3.0 对 4.0(运动,p = 0.448)。24 小时后,静息时两臂的这一数字均降至 2.5(p = 0.842),但运动时则增至 4.8 对 3.5(p = 0.383)。激光手术的中位手术时间(32.5 分钟)明显短于 LIFT(P 0.05):局限性:曾接受过瘘管手术的患者(约占 20%)导致了异质性。结论:激光瘘管闭合术是瘘管手术的替代方法:激光瘘管闭合术是 LIFT 的一种替代方法,尽管激光臂的瘘管解剖结构更复杂,但术后疼痛相似,手术时间更短,QOL 有更大改善:试验注册:ClinicalTrials.gov:试验注册:ClinicalTrials.gov:NCT06212739。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Postoperative pain following laser fistula closure versus ligation of the intersphincteric fistula tract: A prospective double-blinded randomized controlled trial.

Background: Prior studies focus primarily on surgical outcomes of anal fistula treatment, such as healing rates, rather than patient-reported outcomes, such as postoperative pain, which could influence surgical choice.

Objective: To compare pain scores at 6 and 24 h postoperatively between laser closure and ligation of the intersphincteric tract for anal fistula.

Design: Prospective, double-blinded randomized controlled trial.

Settings: A quaternary hospital in Malaysia.

Patients: Patients aged 18-75 years with high transsphincteric fistulas.

Intervention: Fistula laser closure versus ligation of the fistula tract (LIFT) treatment.

Main outcome measures: Pain scores, continence, quality of life (QOL), operative time, and treatment failure were compared using chi-square, Fisher's exact test, student t-test, or Mann-Whitney with p < 0.05 denoting statistical significance.

Results: Fifty-six patients were recruited (laser, n = 28, LIFT, n = 28). Median pain scores for laser versus LIFT at 6 h postoperatively were 1.0 versus 2.0 (Rest, p = 0.213) and 3.0 versus 4.0 (Movement, p = 0.448), respectively. At 24 h, this reduced to 2.5 in both arms at rest (p = 0.842) but increased to 4.8 versus 3.5 on movement (p = 0.383). Median operative time for laser was significantly shorter (32.5 min) than LIFT (p < 0.001). Laser treated patients trended toward quicker return to work (10.5 vs. 14.0, p = 0.181) but treatment failure was similar (54% vs. 50%, p = 0.71). No patients developed postoperative incontinence. Mean SF-36 scores increased from baseline (67.1 ± 17.0; 95% CI 63.6-82.4 vs. 71.3 ± 11.4; 95% CI 64.0-75.0) to 6 months postoperatively (77.7 ± 21.0; 95% CI 57.0-80.3 vs. 74.0 ± 14.3; 95% CI 67.6-81.4) regardless of the type of surgery (P > 0.05).

Limitations: Patients with prior fistula surgery (approximately 20%) led to heterogeneity. The total laser energy delivered varied depending on fistula anatomy.

Conclusion: Laser fistula closure is an alternative to LIFT, with similar postoperative pain and shorter operative time despite more complex fistula anatomy in the laser arm, with a greater improvement in QOL.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT06212739.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
World Journal of Surgery
World Journal of Surgery 医学-外科
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
3.80%
发文量
460
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: World Journal of Surgery is the official publication of the International Society of Surgery/Societe Internationale de Chirurgie (iss-sic.com). Under the editorship of Dr. Julie Ann Sosa, World Journal of Surgery provides an in-depth, international forum for the most authoritative information on major clinical problems in the fields of clinical and experimental surgery, surgical education, and socioeconomic aspects of surgical care. Contributions are reviewed and selected by a group of distinguished surgeons from across the world who make up the Editorial Board.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信