【摘要】 目的运用Meta分析方法比较括约肌间瘘管结扎术与切开挂线术治疗肛瘘的临床效果及安全性。方法收集2007年1月1日至2018年2月28日发表的有关括约肌间瘘管结扎术与切开挂线术治疗肛瘘的国内外相关文献,最终筛选后共纳入12篇文献,包括574例患者采用括约肌间瘘管结扎术治疗肛瘘,592例患者采用切开挂线术治疗肛瘘。对纳入的文献进行质量评价,利用Revman 5. 2软件对临床效果及安全性评价进行Meta分析。结果括约肌间瘘管结扎术手术与切开挂线术相比治疗肛瘘的临床治疗成功率差异无统计学意义(P> 0. 05);在手术时间方面,切开挂线术优于括约肌间瘘管结扎术手术,差异有统计学意义(P <0. 01);而在住院时间、创面愈合时间及术后并发症发生率方面,括约肌间瘘管结扎术手术优于切开挂线术,差异有统计学意义(P <0. 01)。结论虽然LIFT手术与切开挂线术在成功率上无明显差别,但是LIFT手术与切开挂线术比较,术后愈合快,住院时间短,并发症少。更多还原

【Abstract】 Objective To compare the clinical efficacy and safety of ligation of the intersphincteric fistula tract( LIFT) and incisionthread-drawing procedure in the treatment of anal fistula by meta analysis. Methods Searched the relevant articles on the treatment of anal fistula by LIFT and incision-thread-drawing procedure from Janurary 1 st,2007 to February 28 th,2018. At last,12 articles were included totally,of which 574 patients received LIFT and 592 patients treated with incision-thread-drawing procedure for anal fistula. The quality of the included articles was evaluated and the Revman 5. 2 software was used to analyze the clinical effiacy and safety. Results The statistical analysis showed that there was no significant difference in the clinical success rate of LIFT compared with incision and drainage( P > 0. 05). The incision and drainage was superior to the LIFT on the operation time,the difference was statistically significant( P < 0. 01). The LIFT was superior to incision and drainage on the hospitalization stay,time of wound healing and the incidence of postoperative complications,the difference was statistically significant( P < 0. 01). Conclusion Although there is no obvious difference in the success rate between LIFT and incision and drainage,patients can get faster postoperative healing,shorter hospitalization stay and less complications.更多还原