PREOPERATIVE DIAGNOSIS OF ANAL FISTULA: MRI+DRE OR DRE ALONE?
Abstract
The last word in anal fistula surgery has not been written. The literature is unclear on which patient should undergo a preoperative magnetic resonance imaging [MRI]. Most guidelines are clear that complex and recurrent fistulae, or those with a background of inflammatory bowel disease, should undergo an MRI evaluation, but otherwise the guidelines are hazy and ill defined.
In this study, over a 06-month period from May 2019 to October 2019, all patients who clinically presented with anal fistula underwent MRI of the anorectal region. The clinical findings on digital rectal examination [DRE] were compared to the final radiological diagnosis, and the peri-operative findings. The fidelity of the MRI diagnosis was the endpoint of the analysis, as was the impact on the operative strategy. A change in operative course was brought about by the MRI, in a percentage of 16.1% which is quite significant. None of the patients had an endo-anal ultrasound as it is not part of our protocol.
It is concluded that the addition of the MRI changed the surgical approach in a significant proportion of patients with fistula in ano and consequently it is now part of our regular workup of every anal fistula patient, to do an MRI preoperatively. By adding MRI, our recurrence rates came down significantly which is quite evident in the follow-up.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Parks AG (1961) Pathogenesis and treatment of fistula-in-ano. BrMed J 1(5224):463–460
Parks AG, Gordon PH, Hardcastle JD (1976) A classification offistula-in-ano. BJS 63(1):1–2
Van BB, Grandin C, Kartheuser A, Hoang P, Mahieu P, Detry R,Vanheuverzwijn R, Pringot J (1994) MRI of complicated analfistulae: comparison with digital examination. J Comput AssistTomogr 18(1):87–90
Perini L, Marcon M, Bidoli L, Fabris G, Ferraro B, Cavallo A,Zacchi C (1995) Magnetic resonance in the assessment of perianalfistula. La RadiologiaMedica 89(5):637–642
Spencer JA, Chapple K,WilsonD,WardJ,Windsor AC, AmbroseNS (1998) Outcome after surgery for perianal fistula: predictivevalue of MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 171(2):403–406
Spencer JA, Ward J, Beckingham IJ, Adams C, Ambrose NS(1996) Dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging of perianal fistulas.AJR Am J Roentgenol 167(3):735–741
Barker PG, Lunniss PJ, Armstrong P, Reznek RH, Cottam K,Phillips RK (1994) Magnetic resonance imaging of fistula-in-ano:technique, interpretation and accuracy. Clin Radiol 49(1):7–13
Beets-Tan RG, Beets GL, van der Hoop AG, Kessels AG, VliegenRF, Baeten CG, van Engelshoven JM (2001) Preoperative MRimaging of anal fistulas: does it really help the surgeon?Radiology 218(1):75–84
Lunniss PJ, Armstrong P, Barker PG, Reznek RH, Phillips RK(1992) Magnetic resonance imaging of anal fistulae. Lancet340(8816):394–396
Buchanan G, Halligan S, Williams A, Cohen CR, Tarroni D,Phillips RK, Bartram CI (2002) Effect of MRI on clinical outcomeof recurrent fistula-in-ano. Lancet 360(9346):1661–1662
Morris J, Spencer JA (2000) Ambrose NS. MR imaging classificationof perianal fistulas and its implications for patientmanagement.Radiographics 20(3):623–635
Van Koperen PJ, Horsthuis K, Bemelman WA, Stoker J, Slors JF(2008) Perianal fistulas: developments in the classification and diagnostictechniques, and a new treatment strategy. Ned TijdschrGeneeskd 152(51–52):2774–2780
Grandjean JP, Daville O, Henry L, Milox B, Tissot O, Valette PJ.Magnetic resonance study of complex anal fistulae. Preliminaryresults apropos of 28 cases. In Annales de chirurgie 1997 (Vol 51,No 4, pp 314–317)
Hussain SM, Stoker J, SchoutenWR, HopWC, Laméris JS (1996)Fistula in ano: endoanal sonography versus endoanal MR imagingin classification. Radiology 200(2):475–481
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.