Published in

Springer, Techniques in Coloproctology, 2(15), p. 135-141, 2011

DOI: 10.1007/s10151-011-0683-7

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

The management of patients with primary chronic anal fissure: a position paper

This paper is made freely available by the publisher.
This paper is made freely available by the publisher.

Full text: Download

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Orange circle
Postprint: archiving restricted
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

Anal fissure is one of the most common and painful proctologic diseases. Its treatment has long been discussed and several different therapeutic options have been proposed. In the last decades, the understanding of its pathophysiology has led to a progressive reduction of invasive and potentially invalidating treatments in favor of conservative treatment based on anal sphincter muscle relaxation. Despite some systematic reviews and an American position statement, there is ongoing debate about the best treatment for anal fissure. This review is aimed at identifying the best treatment option drawing on evidence-based medicine and on the expert advice of 6 colorectal surgeons with extensive experience in this field in order to produce an Italian position statement for anal fissures. While there is little chance of a cure with conservative behavioral therapy, medical treatment with calcium channel blockers, diltiazem and nifepidine or glyceryl trinitrate, had a considerable success rate ranging from 50 to 90%. Use of 0.4% glyceryl trinitrate in standardized fashion seems to have the best results despite a higher percentage of headache, while the use of botulinum toxin had inconsistent results. Nonresponding patients should undergo lateral internal sphincterotomy. The risk of incontinence after this procedure seems to have been overemphasized in the past. Only a carefully selected group of patients, without anal hypertonia, could benefit from anoplasty.