Hiring in life sciences? Share your open positions with our professional community. Read more Close

Advertisement

Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Botulinum Toxin and Nitroglycerin in the Treatment of Chronic Anal Fissures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Clinical Trials.

Created on 28 Aug 2026

Authors

Hamid Reihani, Ali Daneshmandi, Amir Hossein Hassani, Maryam Hashemi

Published in

BioMed research international. Volume 2026. Issue 1. Pages e6831460.

Abstract

Chronic anal fissures (CAF) are a common anorectal condition that significantly impacts patients' quality of life. Treatment options include pharmacological therapies, such as botulinum toxin (BT) and topical nitroglycerin (TNG). Despite their widespread use, the relative efficacy and safety of BT and TNG remain controversial. This systematic review and meta-analysis is aimed at comparing the effectiveness, recurrence rates, and adverse effects of BT and TNG in the treatment of CAF.
A comprehensive search was conducted across multiple databases, including PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane. Studies were included if they compared BT with TNG in the treatment of CAF. Ten clinical trials, comprising 698 patients, were included. Data were extracted and analyzed using STATA, and risk ratios were calculated for healing rates, recurrence rates, and side effects.
The analysis showed that BT resulted in significantly higher healing rates compared with TNG (risk ratio: 1.18, 95% CI: 1.02-1.36, p = 0.029). However, there was no significant difference in recurrence rates between the two treatments (p = 0.146). BT was associated with a significantly lower incidence of side effects, including headaches, compared with TNG (p < 0.001).
BT is more effective than TNG in the healing of CAF, with a superior safety profile. These findings suggest that BT may be the preferable treatment option for CAF.

PMID:
42663187
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 28 Aug 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Advertisement

Stats

  • Community rating n/a 0 votes
  • Reviewers' rating n/a 0 votes
  • Your rating

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

  • Recommendations n/a n/a positive of 0 vote(s)
  • Views 4
  • Comments 0

Recommended by

  • No recommendations yet.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.

Advertisement