MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166492613

Meta-analysis of fibrin glue versus surgery for treatment of fistula-in-ano.

2011· article· en· W2166492613 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Roberto Cirocchi, Alberto Santoro, Stefano Trastulli, Eriberto Farinella, Gaetano Rocco, D Vendettuali, Marco Coccetta, N Gullà, Carlo Boselli, Nicola Avenia, Francesco Sciannameo, A Basoli

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnorectal Disease Treatments and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFibrin glueFistulotomyAnal fistulaRandomized controlled trialSurgeryFistulaSubgroup analysisGLUEMeta-analysisInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: To evaluate the convenience in terms of recurrence and fecal incontinence rates of fibrin glue versus surgical treatment in the management of fistula-in-ano. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized studies (CCTs) comparing conventional surgical treatment versus fibrin glue treatment in patients with perianal fistulae were identified using a predefined search strategy. The post treatment anal incontinence rate and the fistula recurrence rates between the two operations were compared by using the methods provided by the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. The lack of homogeneity of results between the different studies did not allow to analyze other secondary outcomes. Patients with cryptoglandular and Crohn's anal fistula were enrolled in the analysis. The employed fibrin glue came from commercial kits: Beriplast (Aventis Behring, Sussex, United Kingdom) and Tisseal or Tissucol (Baxter, Inc, Mississauga, Ontario). Surgical conventional treatment consisted of fistulotomy, placement of a cutting or loose latex seton and advancement mucosal flap closure. All patients were followed up at 6 and 12 weeks, the longest follow up was 6 months. RESULTS: Two RCTs (106 patients) and 1 non randomized studies (232 patients) were identified. The recurrence rate is higher, although still not statistically significant, in those patients who underwent fibrin glue injection (44/81) versus conventional surgical treatment (108/230), (OR: 0.44; 95 %CI: 0.12-1.68; P = 0.23). Furthermore in the analysis of the subgroup of RCTs alone there were not significant differences with the previous results of RCTs with CCT analysis (OR: 0.33; 95 %CI: 0.03-3.66; P = 0.37). In the same way the analysis of the subgroup of RCTs with complex anal fistulae were not statistically significant and similar to the previous results regarding all type of fistulas (OR: 0.86; 95 %CI: 0.01-72.36; P = 0.95). The analysis of post-operative anal incontinence showed no difference between the group who underwent fibrin glue injection (9/230) and the conventional surgical treatment group (10/81), (OR: 1.00; 95 %CI: 0.43-2.34; P = 1.00). A very low heterogeneity in the analysis was detected (Chi-square = 0.04 - P = 0%). CONCLUSION: Our statistical analysis does not show any significant statistical difference between fibrin glue treatment versus conventional surgical treatment for all perianal fistulae in terms of recurrence (P = 0.23) and anal incontinence (P = 1.00).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.199
Threshold uncertainty score0.333

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.327
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.008 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations51
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicAnorectal Disease Treatments and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207