“…The inability to locate internal anal openings, secondary tracts, and abscesses, as well as the patient's pain and discomfort during the procedure, are the main drawbacks of a conventional fistulogram [1]. Practically, this method is rarely used today due to its low sensitivity and specificity compared to other modalities [7]. Due to better soft tissue resolution [6,8], MR imaging has essentially replaced the use of traditional fistulogram studies in the assessment of perianal fistulas.…”