Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up

Systematic review and meta-analysis of 3D-EAUS, unenhanced MRI, and CE-MRI for anal fistula classification

Systematic review and meta-analysis of 3D-EAUS, unenhanced MRI, and CE-MRI for anal fistula classifi…
Photo by Navy Medicine / Unsplash
Key Takeaway
Consider 3D-EAUS as initial imaging and CE-MRI for complex anal fistula cases.

This systematic review and meta-analysis assessed the diagnostic performance of 3D-endoanal ultrasound, unenhanced MRI, and contrast-enhanced MRI for classifying anal fistulas. The authors synthesized data from 4104 cases to compare these imaging modalities against a standard of reference. The primary outcome measured diagnostic efficacy, specifically sensitivity and specificity for various fistula classifications.

For intersphincteric fistulas, 3D-EAUS demonstrated a sensitivity of 0.89 and a specificity of 0.94. Sensitivity for transsphincteric fistulas was 0.96 with a specificity of 0.86. For suprasphincteric fistulas, sensitivity was 0.72. Sensitivity for extrasphincteric fistulas was 0.75. Unenhanced MRI showed sensitivity greater than 0.85 and specificity greater than 0.94 for all classifications. Contrast-enhanced MRI showed sensitivity and specificity exceeding 0.90 for most classifications.

The authors note that 3D-EAUS is the preferred initial examination. Contrast-enhanced MRI is recommended for complex or unclear cases. Safety data, including adverse events and tolerability, were not reported. The study does not establish causality, as the source is a review of existing diagnostic accuracy studies. Practice relevance is restricted to diagnostic selection rather than treatment outcomes.

Study Details

Study typeMeta analysis
EvidenceLevel 1
PublishedMay 2026
View Original Abstract ↓
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Anal fistula severely impacts patients' quality of life, and accurate preoperative Parks classification is critical for surgical planning and anal sphincter preservation. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the diagnostic efficacy of 3D-endoanal ultrasound (3D-EAUS) and unenhanced/contrast-enhanced (CE) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for anal fistula classification. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Following PRISMA guidelines, PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library were searched for studies (2010-2025) comparing the two modalities, with diagnostic indices extracted and meta-analyzed via RevMan 5.3. RESULTS: A total of 32 studies involving 4104 anal fistula cases were included. The summary receiver operating characteristic curves of 3D-EAUS, unenhanced MRI, and contrast-enhanced MRI (CE-MRI) showed that most points fell on or in the upper-left corner of the curves, indicating good diagnostic performance for all three modalities. 3D-EAUS exhibited high sensitivity and specificity for intersphincteric (SEN: 0.89, SPE: 0.94) and transsphincteric anal fistulas (SEN: 0.96, SPE: 0.86), but lower diagnostic sensitivity for suprasphincteric (SEN: 0.72) and extrasphincteric (SEN: 0.75) fistulas. unenhanced MRI demonstrated high specificity (>0.94) for all classifications and moderate sensitivity (>0.85), except for suprasphincteric fistulas (SEN: 0.71). CE-MRI showed the highest diagnostic accuracy, with both sensitivity and specificity exceeding 0.90 for most classifications. CONCLUSION: Both 3D-EAUS and MRI can effectively diagnose anal fistulas. 3D-EAUS is the preferred initial examination, and CE-MRI is recommended for complex or unclear cases, providing an evidence-based basis for clinical decision-making and improving patient prognosis.
Free Newsletter

Clinical research that matters. Delivered to your inbox.

Join thousands of clinicians and researchers. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.