Dataset Information

Treatment of Perianal Fistulas in Crohn's Disease, Seton Versus Anti-TNF Versus Surgical Closure Following Anti-TNF [PISA]: A Randomised Controlled Trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background and aims

Most patients with perianal Crohn's fistula receive medical treatment with anti-tumour necrosis factor [TNF], but the results of anti-TNF treatment have not been directly compared with chronic seton drainage or surgical closure. The aim of this study was to assess if chronic seton drainage for patients with perianal Crohn's disease fistulas would result in less re-interventions, compared with anti-TNF and compared with surgical closure.

Methods

This randomised trial was performed in 19 European centres. Patients with high perianal Crohn's fistulas with a single internal opening were randomly assigned to: i] chronic seton drainage for 1 year; ii] anti-TNF therapy for 1 year; and iii] surgical closure after 2 months under a short course anti-TNF. The primary outcome was the cumulative number of patients with fistula-related re-intervention[s] at 1.5 years. Patients declining randomisation due to a specific treatment preference were included in a parallel prospective PISA registry cohort.

Results

Between September 14, 2013 and November 20, 2017, 44 of the 126 planned patients were randomised. The study was stopped by the data safety monitoring board because of futility. Seton treatment was associated with the highest re-intervention rate [10/15, versus 6/15 anti-TNF and 3/14 surgical closure patients, p = 0.02]. No substantial differences in perianal disease activity and quality of life between the three treatment groups were observed. Interestingly, in the PISA prospective registry, inferiority of chronic seton treatment was not observed for any outcome measure.

Conclusions

The results imply that chronic seton treatment should not be recommended as the sole treatment for perianal Crohn's fistulas.

SUBMITTER: Wasmann KA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7476637 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionA high prevalence of cryptoglandular and Crohn's perianal fistulas has been reported worldwide, and several surgical options are available for the management of anal fistula, with varying clinical efficacy. However, currently, the available evidence for the effectiveness of these surgical approaches are lacking and of concern in terms of the credibility and strength. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the credibility of the published systematic reviews and meta-analyses that assess the efficacy and safety of the surgical options for cryptoglandular and Crohn's perianal fistulas through an umbrella review.Methods and analysisA systematic search in PubMed, Embase and Cochrane library will be performed from inception to December 2020 without any language restriction. We will include systematic reviews and meta-analyses that investigate the efficacy and safety of surgical approaches in the management of cryptoglandular and Crohn's perianal fistulas. Two reviewers will independently screen search results through reading the titles or abstracts. Relevant information will be extracted from each eligible systematic review or meta-analysis. Based on random effects model summary estimates along with their p values, 95% prediction intervals, between-study heterogeneity, small-study effects and excess significance, we will classify the evidence from convincing (class I) to weak (class IV). Findings will be summarized using quantitative synthesis combined with a narrative approach. Cryptoglandular and Crohn's perianal fistulas will be summarized separately. Two authors will independently perform the literature search, data extraction, and quality assessment of each included systematic review and meta-analysis. Any unresolved conflicts or doubts will be resolved by discussion or by consulting a senior author. The risk of bias of the systematic reviews will be assessed using a 16-item Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR2) checklist. The strength of evidence for the included systematic reviews will be classified as "high", "moderate", "low", or "critically low" quality.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval is not required as we will collect data from the published systematic reviews and meta-analyses without using individual patient data. The results of this umbrella review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and will be presented at an anorectal disease conference.Prospero registration numberCRD42020200754.