An observational study in Perianal Fistula, sponsored by Zagazig University. Completed at 1 site in Egypt. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2024-09-27.
Sponsored by Zagazig University · Observational
a study that detect the most suitable surgical techniques for treating transsphincteric fistula
we compared between LIFT and MAF in elderly with PAF
189 studies on the registry are indexed under Rectal Fistula; 42 are open to participants now.
This study's enrollment of 257 is above the median of 94 across 50 observational studies indexed under Rectal Fistula.
Browse Rectal Fistula studies →Zagazig University is the lead sponsor of 447 studies on the registry; 75 are open to participants now.
Of its 5 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 0 (0%) have results posted.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
two hundred and fifty seven elderly patient with PAF
Exclusion Criteria:
Procedure: LIFT
Procedure: MAF
use mucosal advancement flap to treat PAF
use LIFT surgery for treating PAF
healing rate
incidence of healing in both approaches
Time frame: three years
incontinence
incidence of incontinence after both approaches
Time frame: three years
Plan to share: No
No publications or documents are linked to this record.
This study is completed, as verified in Sep 2024. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
Zagazig University