非标准化手术外侧内括约肌切开术:是否有共识?

IF 0.5 Q4 SURGERY
Neriman Şengül, Buse Balcı, Hatice Maras, Cihangir Akyol
{"title":"非标准化手术外侧内括约肌切开术:是否有共识?","authors":"Neriman Şengül, Buse Balcı, Hatice Maras, Cihangir Akyol","doi":"10.47717/turkjsurg.2025.2025-4-18","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Lateral internal sphincterotomy (LIS) is considered the gold standard surgical treatment for chronic anal fissures. However, substantial variation exists in the surgical techniques applied. This study aims to evaluate practice differences among surgeons performing LIS and to assess whether a consensus has been established.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>An anonymous online survey was conducted to assess surgeons' technical approaches to LIS. Data were collected using a 24-question survey targeting surgeons from various countries.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 207 surgeons (131 from Türkiye, 76 from other countries) responded. The majority were male (73.3%) and between 40 and 64 years of age (64.7%). Most participants (70%) had more than 10 years of surgical experience, and 55% were affiliated with academic centers. The open technique was preferred by 73.6% of respondents, while 21.4% opted for the closed method. Partial sphincterotomy was favored by 66%, followed by complete (21%) and tailored (12%) approaches. Substantial heterogeneity was noted in bowel preparation, patient positioning, incision type, and management of skin tags or hypertrophied papillae. Only 6% reported routine use of anorectal manometry. Variations were more prominent across countries than between demographic groups. The principal finding of the study is the lack of a standardized approach to LIS across international surgical communities.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There is no standardized approach to LIS among surgeons. Surgical technique preferences vary significantly and appear to be influenced more by geographic practice location than by individual surgeon characteristics such as age, gender, or experience.</p>","PeriodicalId":23374,"journal":{"name":"Turkish Journal of Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Non-standardized surgery lateral internal sphincterotomy: Is there a consensus?\",\"authors\":\"Neriman Şengül, Buse Balcı, Hatice Maras, Cihangir Akyol\",\"doi\":\"10.47717/turkjsurg.2025.2025-4-18\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Lateral internal sphincterotomy (LIS) is considered the gold standard surgical treatment for chronic anal fissures. However, substantial variation exists in the surgical techniques applied. This study aims to evaluate practice differences among surgeons performing LIS and to assess whether a consensus has been established.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>An anonymous online survey was conducted to assess surgeons' technical approaches to LIS. Data were collected using a 24-question survey targeting surgeons from various countries.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 207 surgeons (131 from Türkiye, 76 from other countries) responded. The majority were male (73.3%) and between 40 and 64 years of age (64.7%). Most participants (70%) had more than 10 years of surgical experience, and 55% were affiliated with academic centers. The open technique was preferred by 73.6% of respondents, while 21.4% opted for the closed method. Partial sphincterotomy was favored by 66%, followed by complete (21%) and tailored (12%) approaches. Substantial heterogeneity was noted in bowel preparation, patient positioning, incision type, and management of skin tags or hypertrophied papillae. Only 6% reported routine use of anorectal manometry. Variations were more prominent across countries than between demographic groups. The principal finding of the study is the lack of a standardized approach to LIS across international surgical communities.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There is no standardized approach to LIS among surgeons. Surgical technique preferences vary significantly and appear to be influenced more by geographic practice location than by individual surgeon characteristics such as age, gender, or experience.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23374,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Turkish Journal of Surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Turkish Journal of Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.47717/turkjsurg.2025.2025-4-18\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Turkish Journal of Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47717/turkjsurg.2025.2025-4-18","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:外侧内括约肌切开术被认为是治疗慢性肛裂的金标准手术方法。然而,在应用的手术技术上存在着实质性的差异。本研究旨在评估实施LIS的外科医生之间的实践差异,并评估是否已建立共识。材料和方法:进行了一项匿名在线调查,以评估外科医生对LIS的技术方法。数据是通过针对来自不同国家的外科医生的24个问题的调查收集的。结果:共有207名外科医生(131名来自土耳其,76名来自其他国家)回应。其中男性居多(73.3%),年龄在40 - 64岁之间(64.7%)。大多数参与者(70%)有超过10年的手术经验,55%隶属于学术中心。73.6%的受访者选择开放式方法,21.4%的受访者选择封闭式方法。66%的人喜欢部分括约肌切开术,其次是完全(21%)和量身定制(12%)的入路。在肠准备、患者体位、切口类型和皮赘或肥大乳头的处理方面存在显著的异质性。只有6%的人报告常规使用肛门直肠测压仪。不同国家之间的差异比不同人口群体之间的差异更明显。该研究的主要发现是在国际外科社区中缺乏一种标准化的LIS方法。结论:外科医生对LIS没有统一的治疗方法。手术技术的偏好差异很大,而且似乎更多地受地理位置的影响,而不是受个体外科医生的特征(如年龄、性别或经验)的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Non-standardized surgery lateral internal sphincterotomy: Is there a consensus?

Objective: Lateral internal sphincterotomy (LIS) is considered the gold standard surgical treatment for chronic anal fissures. However, substantial variation exists in the surgical techniques applied. This study aims to evaluate practice differences among surgeons performing LIS and to assess whether a consensus has been established.

Material and methods: An anonymous online survey was conducted to assess surgeons' technical approaches to LIS. Data were collected using a 24-question survey targeting surgeons from various countries.

Results: A total of 207 surgeons (131 from Türkiye, 76 from other countries) responded. The majority were male (73.3%) and between 40 and 64 years of age (64.7%). Most participants (70%) had more than 10 years of surgical experience, and 55% were affiliated with academic centers. The open technique was preferred by 73.6% of respondents, while 21.4% opted for the closed method. Partial sphincterotomy was favored by 66%, followed by complete (21%) and tailored (12%) approaches. Substantial heterogeneity was noted in bowel preparation, patient positioning, incision type, and management of skin tags or hypertrophied papillae. Only 6% reported routine use of anorectal manometry. Variations were more prominent across countries than between demographic groups. The principal finding of the study is the lack of a standardized approach to LIS across international surgical communities.

Conclusion: There is no standardized approach to LIS among surgeons. Surgical technique preferences vary significantly and appear to be influenced more by geographic practice location than by individual surgeon characteristics such as age, gender, or experience.

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
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
16
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信