Ligation of the Intersphincteric Fistula Tract: An Effective New Technique for Complex Fistulas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The management of complex fistulas is difficult. Maintaining continence while achieving durable fistula closure is the goal of surgical management. This study describes our experience with a novel sphincter-sparing technique called the ligation of the intersphincteric fistula tract, which involves ligation and division of the fistula tract in the intersphincteric space. METHODS: All patients from July 2007 to December 2008 with trans- or suprasphincteric fistula treated with the procedure were prospectively followed. Procedures were performed by surgeons with fellowship training in a referral center. Demographic data, comorbidities, previous repair attempts, and postoperative data were collected. RESULTS: A total of 39 patients underwent a ligation of the intersphincteric fistula tract during a 17-month period. Median age was 49 years. A total of 29 patients (74%) had previous attempts at repair, with a median of 2 failed repairs. Follow-up data were available in 90% (35 of 39). Median follow-up was 20 weeks. Successful fistula closure was achieved in 57% of the patients (20 of 35). Median time to failure was 10 weeks (range, 2-38 weeks). No patient reported any subjective decrease in continence after the procedure. CONCLUSION: Ligation of the intersphincteric fistula tract is a new sphincter-sparing procedure for complex transsphincteric fistula. The success rate is comparable with other sphincter-preserving techniques. Importantly, it appeared to effectively preserve continence. Adding safe, muscle-sparing surgical options to our armamentarium for dealing with transsphincteric fistula is essential. Additionally, the procedure is easy to learn and has very low cost. Long-term follow-up and randomized, controlled trials are necessary to assess efficacy and durability.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".