Table 2.
Reported Results for FiLaC Studies
| Study | Median Duration of Follow-Up Mths (Range) | Numbers | Type of Fistula | Secondary Extensions | Previous Fistula Surgery | Prior Seton | Closure of Internal Opening | Success |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nordholm-Carstensen et al (2021)12 | 19 (12–26) | 66 | High IS – 2 | Not reported | 22 (32%) | 66 (100%) | Suture | 30 (44.1%) |
| Low TS – 20 | ||||||||
| High TS – 41 | ||||||||
| SS – 5 | ||||||||
| Wolicki et al (2020)18 | 41.99 (4–87)* | 83 | TS/IS – numbers not specified | Not reported | 28 (33.7%) | 65 (78.3%) | Z-stitch suture closure | 62 (74.7%) |
| de Bonnechose et al (2020)9 | 13.6 (6–23) | 100 | TS low – 8 | 13 (13%) | NS (mean = 2.4 prior operations for entire study population) | 83 (100%) | None | 41 (44.6%)** |
| TS high – 79 | ||||||||
| SS - 13 | ||||||||
| Isik et al (2020)13 | 48 (6–56) | 100 | IS – 10 | Not reported | Not reported | Not reported | None | 62 (62%) |
| TS low – 28 | ||||||||
| TS high – 54 | ||||||||
| SS - 8 | ||||||||
| Serin et al (2020)10 | 11 (6–17.6) | 35 | IS – 21 | Not reported | 12 (34%) | 10 (28.5%) | Purse-string closure | 15 (42.9%) |
| TS – 12 | ||||||||
| SS/ES – 2 | ||||||||
| Alam et al (2019)20 | 7.1 (2–22.5) | 20 | IS – 1 | 6 (30%) | NS (mean - 2.45 prior fistula operations for study population) | “Selective” (number not specified) | None | 11 (55%) |
| TS low – 3 | ||||||||
| TS high – 14 | ||||||||
| SS – 1 | ||||||||
| ES – 1 | ||||||||
| De Hous et al (2019)19 | 9 (4–26) | 10 | TS – 12 | 4 (40%) | 10 (100%) | Not reported | Suture | 7(70%) |
| IS – 3 (NB. some patients had multiple fistulas) | ||||||||
| Stijns et al (2019)17 | 10 (7.3)*** | 20 | IS – 6 | 0 | – | 16 (80%) | None | 4 (20%) |
| TS – 14 | ||||||||
| Marref et al (2019)14 | 6.3 (4.2–9.3) | 69**** | IS – 2 | 22 (32%) | 37 (54.4%) | 33 (48.5%) | None | 31 (45.6%) |
| Low TS – 10 | ||||||||
| High TS – 45 | ||||||||
| SS – 11 | ||||||||
| Terzi et al (2018)22 | 28 (2–50) | 103 | Sup – 7 | Not reported | 34 (33%) | 19 (18.4%) | None | 41 (39.8%) |
| IS – 56 | ||||||||
| TS – 29 | ||||||||
| SS - 11 | ||||||||
| Lauretta et al (2018)11 | 11.3 (6–24) | 30 | TS - 30 | 0 | 22 (73.3%) | 26 (86.6%) | None | 10 (33%) |
| Donmez et al (2017)16 | 22 (17–26) | 27 | IS – 14 | N | Not reported | 5 (18.5%) | None | 24(89%) |
| TS – 7 | ||||||||
| SS – 5 | ||||||||
| ES – 1 | ||||||||
| Wilhelm et al (2017)15 | 25.4 (6–60) | 117 | IS – 8 | Not reported | 16 (14%) | 99 (84.6%) | Yes – suture/flap closure | 75 (64.1%) |
| TS – 90 | ||||||||
| SS – 13 | ||||||||
| ES – 6 | ||||||||
| Giamundo et al (2015)21 | 30 (6–46) | 45 | IS – 7 | 0 | 35 (78%) | 24 (53%) | None | 32 (71%) |
| Low TS – 7 | ||||||||
| Mid TS – 19 | ||||||||
| High TS – 10 | ||||||||
| SS – 2 |
Notes: *Mean/SD. **41/92 patients followed up. ***IQR, inter-quartile range. ****1 patient lost to follow-up (so analysis included 68 patients).
Abbreviations: Sup, superficial; IS, intersphincteric; TS, transsphincteric; SS, suprasphincteric; ES, extrasphincteric.