Prospective randomised trial comparing ayurvedic cutting seton and fistulotomy for low fistula-in-ano

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate the role of ayurvedic setons in the treatment of low fistula-in-ano. One hundred and eight patients were randomised into either conventional fistulotomy (F) or ayurvedic cutting seton insertion (C). Endpoints investigated included time to wound healing and complications of surgery. Post-operative pain scores were measured daily using a visual analog scale. Anal function was compared using a continence score. Pre- and postoperative manometry and ultrasound were also performed. After exclusions, there were 54 patients in group F and 46 in group C. There were no differences in age, sex or follow-up duration between the two groups. Healing time was similar between the groups. Group C reported more pain following operation and on the first 2–4 postoperative days, but both groups experienced the same amount of pain subsequently. In conclusion, chemical seton was more painful than conventional fistulotomy in the first few days following surgery. However, there was no difference in time to wound healing, complications or functional outcome.