Purpose: The objective of our study was to compare MRI of fistulas-in-ano using an endoanal coil with that using a pelvic phased array coil and to assess the value of a combined approach by correlating the findings with those at surgery.
Method: Twenty consecutive patients with clinical suspicion of perianal sepsis were studied using an endoanal coil immediately followed by a phased array coil. T1 weighted and STIR images in transverse and coronal planes were made with each coil and analysed by noting the presence and site of a collection and primary track, the position of any internal opening, and subcutaneous or supralevator extension. Operative findings were similarly recorded.
Results: Of 20 patients with suspected fistulas, 8 had simple fistulas, 8 had complex fistulas, and 4 had no current evidence of infection. The concordance between MR and surgery for identifying the presence and site of the collection, the primary track, and the internal opening in both simple and complex cases was superior using the endoanal coil as compared with the phased array. Both coils together reflected the findings of the endoanal coil used alone. However, for supralevator/subcutaneous extension, concordance was superior using the phased array compared with the endoanal coil, and a combined approach reflected the values of the phased array coil used alone.
Conclusion: Endoanal MRI is highly sensitive in the delineation of fistulas-in-ano. In combination with phased array techniques, it provides valuable preoperative assessment in both simple and complex cases.