American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol 171, 403-406, Copyright © 1998 by American Roentgen Ray Society

ARTICLES

Outcome after surgery for perianal fistula: predictive value of MR imaging

JA Spencer, K Chapple, D Wilson, J Ward, AC Windsor and NS Ambrose
Department of Radiology, St. James's University Hospital, Leeds, United Kingdom.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine if MR findings are predictive of long-term outcome in a cohort of patients whose initial surgery was performed without access to the findings of MR imaging. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Forty patients with surgically proven perianal fistulas underwent preoperative dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging. The MR and surgical findings were independently recorded on an identical anatomic form. Three patients were subsequently lost to follow-up. The outcome for the remaining 37 patients was determined from surgical review, case notes, and questionnaires. Minimum follow-up period was 14 months (range, 14-39 months). Outcome was determined by one observer who was unaware of the initial MR grading and had not been present during surgery. Outcome was considered unsatisfactory if further surgery was required. RESULTS: MR imaging was better than surgical exploration in predicting outcome (for MR imaging: positive predictive value, 73%; negative predictive value, 87%; sensitivity, 89%; and specificity, 68%; for surgical exploration: positive predictive value, 57%; negative predictive value, 64%; sensitivity, 73%; and specificity, 47%). MR classification of fistulas was significantly associated with outcome (p = .0004), and surgical classification was not significantly associated with outcome (p = .22, chi-square test). Also MR grades differed significantly for patients with satisfactory and unsatisfactory outcomes (p < .001, Mann-Whitney U test). CONCLUSION: MR imaging is valuable in the management of patients with perianal fistulas. MR imaging accurately reveals surgical anatomy and can be used to make better predictions regarding patient outcome than surgical findings.
CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S. Halligan and J. Stoker Imaging of fistula in ano. Radiology, April 1, 2006; 239(1): 18 - 33. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. N. Buchanan, S. Halligan, C. I. Bartram, A. B. Williams, D. Tarroni, and C. R. G. Cohen Clinical Examination, Endosonography, and MR Imaging in Preoperative Assessment of Fistula in Ano: Comparison with Outcome-based Reference Standard Radiology, December 1, 2004; 233(3): 674 - 681. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Mallouhi, H. Bonatti, S. Peer, P. Lugger, F. Conrad, and G. Bodner Detection and Characterization of Perianal Inflammatory Disease: Accuracy of Transperineal Combined Gray Scale and Color Doppler Sonography J. Ultrasound Med., January 1, 2004; 23(1): 19 - 27. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. G. H. Beets-Tan, G. L. Beets, A. G. van der Hoop, A. G. H. Kessels, R. F. A. Vliegen, C. G. M. I. Baeten, and J. M. A. van Engelshoven Preoperative MR Imaging of Anal Fistulas: Does It Really Help the Surgeon? Radiology, January 1, 2001; 218(1): 75 - 84. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				J. A Spencer Magnetic resonance imaging of the pelvis BMJ, May 27, 2000; 320(7247): 1419 - 1420. [Full Text]

				J. Morris, J. A. Spencer, and N. S. Ambrose MR Imaging Classification of Perianal Fistulas and Its Implications for Patient Management RadioGraphics, March 1, 2000; 20(3): 623 - 635. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]