Current imaging techniques for evaluation of fistula in ano: a review

Abstract

Background: Fistula in ano is one of the common anorectal disorders which have a tendency to recur specially in complex cases usually due to missed or undetected sepsis at the time of examination or surgery. A correct identification of the primary source of crypt infection along with a complete understanding of the anatomical course of primary and secondary tracks and abscesses is a prerequisite for the successful management of fistula. Preoperative evaluation of fistula in ano using radio-imaging techniques provides a handy insight of fistula anatomy and helps in planning the appropriate treatment strategy. The objective of this article is to review the role of different radio-imaging techniques in the diagnosis and evaluation of fistula in ano along with their advantages and disadvantages over one another. Main text: A comprehensive literature review was performed searching through the electronic databases as well as the standard textbooks of colorectal surgery. X-rays (plain radiographs and contrast fistulography), computed tomography (CT) scanning, anal endosonography, and magnetic resonance (MR) imaging are the modalities used for preoperative imaging of fistula in ano. Due to low accuracy, X-ray fistulography is not used now for fistula imaging. CT fistulography can be more accurate in cases associated with acute inflammations and abscesses and the fistulas related with inflammatory bowel disease. Anal endosonography and MRI are two of the mostly used and reliable imaging techniques for fistula in ano. Though the use of a 3D technology has improved the accuracy of anal endosonography, MRI is the preferred choice by many. However, various reports have depicted comparable accuracies for both MRI and anal endosonography showing both to be equally sensitive but MRI to be more specific. 3D endoanal ultrasound, on the other hand, is more rapid and can also be used intraoperatively to provide live imaging during surgical exploration. Conclusion: Complex and recurrent fistula cases should undergo a preoperative imaging to reduce the chances of recurrence. MRI is recommended as the imaging modality of choice for such cases. 3D anal endosonography may however be a good option over MRI owing to its rapidity, availability, and potential of intraoperative assistance during surgery.

Role of endoanal ultrasound in the assessment of perianal fistula in correlation with MRI fistulography

“…Our study showed that MRI was superior to ultrasound in the detection of the fibrotic tracts which agreed with Sharma et al study [15].…”

Chronic Cryptoglandular Anal Fistulas: Surgical Outcomes; A Retrospective Case Control Study In 148 Patients with No Risk Factors for Recurrence

“…TRUS had minimal use in our patients studied despite the method is easily performed (available in most anal surgery departments); the method to date is overlapped by MRI findings; in our patients was performed only in few cases, when the MRI findings were inconclusive for the level of the internal opening of AF. [19,20] According to the transverse anal line all fistulas were classified as anterior or posterior anal fistulas. The real classification regarding the characteristics of fistula as length, route, complexity and participation of anal sphincter system in the formation of AF was based in MRI findings.…”

A study of the diagnostic efficacy of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of perianal fistula and its complications

“…Perianal fistula is a condition in which a fistulous communication between the skin and the anorectum develops in the perianal region [1]. Perianal fistulas affect 8.6 cases per 100,000 people [2], with males being more affected than females [3], particularly those in their 40s.…”

“…Conventional fistulograms have been used as an imaging method for perianal fistula before the introduction of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) [3]. The conventional fistulogram involves injecting contrast media into the external skin opening of the fistulous tract and then deter-mining the extent of the fistulous tract using fluoroscopic imaging [1]. 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].…”