View clinical trials related to Perianal Abscess.
Filter by:Drainage of perianal abscesses is a well established treatment. Traditionally its been done in general anesthesia after the swelling has been localised its been drained with a knife. After surgical intervention complications can occur with recidivism, chronic fistulas that go from the anal to the skin and sometimes the anal sphincter is damaged which can cause problems with incontinence. Through ultrasound the abscess is opened under more controlled forms with a better visual overview. This is a new technique that has not been tested in larger studies. The aim with ultrasound-drainage as with traditional incision to drain the abscess so that the infected area can heal. The hypothesis is a reduction of recurrences and formation of fistulas with the use of 3D ultrasonography.
TITLE Perianal Abscess Packing (PAP): a randomised controlled trial (Pilot study) DESIGN Randomised controlled trial. HYPOTHESIS In patients with perianal abscesses incision and drainage without packing the subsequent cavity will reduce patient discomfort without increasing healing time or recurrence compared with management involving cavity packing. OUTCOME MEASURES - Length of hospital stay - Time to cavity healing - Recurrent abscess or fistula formation - Pain score - Analgesia usage POPULATION All patients older than 18 years presenting with a perianal abscess. ELIGIBILITY Exclusion criteria: - under 18 years - those unable to give informed consent - abscesses associated with Crohn's disease or other underlying causes - abscesses in which initial drainage is considered inadequate (if the skin is not open sufficiently to allow drainage of the abscess cavity) DURATION Until recruitment of subjects is complete
The aim of this study is to compare the effect of packing and non-packing on the healing rate of perianal abscess cavities. Secondary objectives are to assess quality of life, cost effectiveness and rate of abscess recurrence and fistula-in-ano formation. If there is no difference in time to healing and non-packing is shown to be safe, acceptable to the patient and cost effective, this approach may become more widely accepted.
To show that prevalence of inflammation of the small bowel in patients with anorectal disease is under-diagnosed based on colonoscopy ileoscopy alone.