Should I stop doing sitz baths for my fissure?

There's no need to stop. No trial found a serious harm from sitz baths, just a mild skin rash in two people in one study. They just don't appear to speed up healing on their own, based on the one direct trial.

Do sitz baths at least help with the pain?

The trials that measured pain mostly found no statistically significant difference, though some patients said they felt more comfortable or satisfied. One post-surgery trial found less burning after bowel movements with sitz baths.

What actually heals a fissure faster?

The trial that tested sitz baths directly gave fiber supplements to both groups, and healing was the same either way, which suggests the fiber may matter more than the water soak itself. This page only covers the evidence on sitz baths, so it can't settle what else works best.

Is it safe to keep doing sitz baths while the fissure heals?

The evidence suggests it's generally safe. One trial reported a mild skin rash in two patients, but no other harms were reported across the studies.

Do sitz baths help an anal fissure heal?

Name: Do sitz baths help an anal fissure heal?
Published: 2026-10-26
Keywords: Sitz Baths for Anal Fissure

In patients with an acute or chronic anal fissure, does the use of sitz baths (warm water soaks) compared with no sitz baths or usual care improve fissure healing rate, pain scores, and time to healing?

Evidence review in plain language · compiled 2026-10-26 · checked 2026-10-26 · next 2026-11-26 · automated review, how it works

Bottom line

A single trial that directly tested sitz baths against no sitz baths found no difference in anal fissure healing after 4 weeks.

The evidence here is weak: only one small trial (58 people) compared sitz baths with no sitz baths, and both groups also took a fiber supplement. Other trials tested sitz baths against surgery, against hot versus cold water, or after surgery rather than against doing nothing, so they can't answer whether the warm water soak itself heals the fissure.

How certain

Low

The randomised evidence here is small or at risk of bias (1 trial).

What it shows

No meaningful benefit

Most of the evidence found no meaningful benefit — no difference, or a worse result than the comparison.

answers it directly: 1answers it directly
studies found: 11studies found
randomised trials: 4randomised trials
people studied: 646people studied
reviews of trials: 2reviews of trials
years covered: 1978–2022years covered
finished, never published: 2finished, never published

What the research shows

Fissure healing rate at 4-8 weeks
The only trial comparing sitz baths with no sitz baths found no significant difference in healing after 4 weeks, when both groups also took a fiber supplement.[1]
No improvement shown
Pain score reduction
Across the trials that measured pain, differences between sitz baths and comparison groups were not statistically significant, though some patients felt more comfortable.[1,2,3]
No improvement shown
Time to symptom resolution
No trial measured time to full symptom resolution for sitz baths against no sitz baths; one small post-surgery trial found a higher 'improvement score' with sitz baths, but it did not reach statistical significance.[1]
Insufficient evidence
Recurrence rate
No trial tested whether sitz baths reduce the chance of a fissure coming back. One study reported a 27% recurrence rate with general conservative treatment, but did not isolate sitz baths.[1]
Not studied
Anal sphincter spasm/pressure change
One trial measured anal pressure as a secondary outcome when comparing hot and cold sitz baths, but did not report specific pressure results.[1]
Insufficient evidence

What it may help with

In the one trial that tested sitz baths directly, patients reported better satisfaction with their treatment, even though fissure healing was the same as with fiber alone.[1]
In a small trial of 46 people recovering from fissure surgery, those who also used twice-daily warm water sitz baths had significantly less anal burning after bowel movements than those given fiber and analgesics alone (p<0.0001); however, overall pain scores after one week did not differ significantly between the groups (p=0.284).[1]
In one 103-person trial, sitz baths combined with eating bran led to a higher fissure healing rate after three weeks (87%) than hydrocortisone ointment (82.4%) or lignocaine ointment (60%), but symptom relief did not differ significantly between the groups; sitz baths were not tested alone in this comparison.[1]

Important limitations

Only one trial directly compared sitz baths with no sitz baths, and it included just 58 people, too few to reliably detect a real difference.[1]
Most of the other trials compared sitz baths with a completely different treatment, such as surgery, hot versus cold water, or ointments, rather than against no treatment, so they can't isolate whether the soak itself does anything.[1,2,3]
Several reviews mention sitz baths only as part of a bundle of general 'conservative care' without separating out their individual effect on healing.[1,2,3,4,5,6]

What the studies found

Found a benefit1 · 9%
Found no clear effect1 · 9%
Mixed or unclear7 · 64%
Found possible harm1 · 9%

What kind of studies

Randomised trial4 · 36%
Narrative review3 · 27%
Retrospective2 · 18%
Systematic review1 · 9%
Meta-analysis1 · 9%

The studies that decided it

Alnasser et al. 2022
The Efficacy of Sitz Baths as Compared to Lateral Internal Sphincterotomy in Patients with Anal Fissures: A Systematic Review
Helps healing, but less than surgery.Systematic reviewLow qualityRelated question
size not given2022
Counted as a related question: This systematic review compares sitz baths to surgery (lateral internal sphincterotomy), not to no treatment or usual care, so it answers which treatment is more effective rather than whether sitz baths alone help healing occur.
Sitz baths healed about 80% of fissures and reduced pain, but healing rates were lower than with lateral internal sphincterotomy; no side effects were reported with sitz baths, while sphincterotomy caused incontinence in some patients.
Who was studied
people with anal fissures
What they received
sitz baths (warm water soaking)
Compared with
lateral internal sphincterotomy (surgery)
Main outcome
healing of the anal fissure, plus pain relief and side effects
Quality
This is a narrative (non-pooled) review of 11 mixed studies with conflicting results on pain relief, so its conclusions are not very strong.
Limitations
The review combines results from 11 different studies without statistical pooling, and notes conflicting evidence on pain relief between studies.
Taken word for word from the abstract
- population An anal fissure is a common condition that affects patients of all ages.
- intervention This study aims to assess the efficacy of a sitz bath as compared to lateral internal sphincterotomy in the treatment of anal fissures.
- comparator lateral internal sphincterotomy
- primaryOutcome Four aspects of sitz bath outcomes were evaluated in the articles.
- result In terms of healing, most articles had similar recovery rates of around 80%.
- result the recovery rates of lateral internal sphincterotomy are superior to those of conservative treatment, including sitz baths.
- result no studies reported side effects from the sitz baths.
Cureus · PMID 36337820 · Read it on PubMed ↗
Maestre et al. 2010
[Cold or hot sitz baths in the emergency treatment of acute anal pain due to anorectal disease? Results of a randomised clinical trial]
No difference, hot vs cold water.Randomised trialLow qualityRelated question
24 people7 days
no statistically significant difference in pain control between cold and hot sitz baths from day 1 to day 7
Who was studied
adults with sudden anal pain from hemorrhoids or anal fissures
What they received
cold water sitz baths (under 15°C)
Compared with
hot water sitz baths (over 30°C)
Main outcome
pain level after 7 days, quality of life, anal pressure, and disease progress
Quality
very small trial (only 24 patients) mixing fissure and hemorrhoid patients together, so it can't tell us much about fissures specifically.
Limitations
small sample size, combined hemorrhoid and fissure patients without separating results, measured pain rather than fissure healing, compared two water temperatures rather than sitz baths versus no sitz baths.
Taken word for word from the abstract
- population patients with acute anal pain due to haemorrhoids or anal fissures
- n 24 were randomised (Group 1: n=12 y Group 2: n=12)
- intervention Group 1: Sitz baths with water at a temperature of less than 15 degrees C
- comparator Group 2: Baths with a water temperature above 30 degrees C
- primaryOutcome An analysis was made of the pain at 7 days (visual analogue scale), quality of life (SF-36), anal at-rest pressure and disease progress
- result There were no statistical differences in pain, but it remained stable in Group 1, but gradually decreased in the patients of Group 2
- result There were no statistically significant differences in pain control from day 1 to day 7 in the Group with sitz baths with hot water.
Cir Esp · PMID 20580349 · Read it on PubMed ↗
Gupta 2007
Effects of warm water sitz bath on symptoms in post-anal sphincterotomy in chronic anal fissure--a randomized and controlled study
Less burning, no less pain, after fissure surgeryRandomised trialLow qualityRelated question
46 peopleone week
no significant difference in pain score after one week, but the sitz bath group had significantly less anal burning; improvement score was higher in the sitz bath group but not statistically significant
Who was studied
adults with chronic anal fissure who had just had sphincterotomy surgery
What they received
twice-daily warm water sitz baths plus fiber supplement and analgesics
Compared with
fiber supplement and analgesics alone, no sitz bath
Main outcome
pain score, anal burning after bowel movements, and symptom improvement over 24 hours
Quality
small trial of only 46 people, and it looked at recovery after fissure surgery rather than at whether sitz baths help a fissure heal.
Limitations
small sample size; measured post-surgical pain and burning rather than fissure healing itself; improvement score difference did not reach statistical significance
Taken word for word from the abstract
- population Forty-six patients were randomly assigned to receive analgesics and fiber supplement alone (control patients) or a twice-daily sitz bath along with identical fiber and analgesics (sitz bath group).
- intervention a twice-daily sitz bath along with identical fiber and analgesics (sitz bath group)
- comparator analgesics and fiber supplement alone (control patients)
- primaryOutcome A 24-h pain score--post-defecation anal burning and symptom improvement--was evaluated on a visual analog scale (VAS).
- result No significant difference in mean pain score between groups (p = 0.284) was noticed after one week. However, the patients from the control group experienced significant anal burning compared with patients from sitz bath group (p < 0.0001). The improvement score was higher in the sitz bath group when compared with the control group; however, it did not reached a statistically significant level.
- n Forty-six patients were randomly assigned
World J Surg · PMID 17534541 · Read it on PubMed ↗
Gupta 2006
Randomized, controlled study comparing sitz-bath and no-sitz-bath treatments in patients with acute anal fissures
No healing benefit, some rash riskRandomised trialLow quality
58 people4 weeks
Pain was lower in the sitz bath group but not statistically significant; no significant difference in fissure healing between groups; sitz bath group reported better satisfaction; two patients in the sitz bath group developed perianal skin rash
Who was studied
Adults with acute anal fissures who were also taking psyllium husk fiber supplement
What they received
Warm water sitz baths (10 minutes after morning defecation and at bedtime) plus psyllium husk
Compared with
No sitz baths, psyllium husk alone
Main outcome
Pain scores and fissure healing after 4 weeks
Quality
This was a small randomized trial with only 52 patients completing it, and the main benefit reported was patient satisfaction rather than actual healing or pain relief.
Limitations
Small sample size, no mention of blinding of outcome assessors, and the main positive finding (satisfaction) was not the primary healing outcome.
Taken word for word from the abstract
- n Fifty-eight subjects were recruited for this study.
- population Individual patients were randomized to either receive sitz baths or no sitz baths for 4 weeks in addition to oral psyllium husk.
- intervention Patients were asked to soak their hips and buttocks in a tub containing plain lukewarm water for 10 min, once after defecation in the morning and again at bedtime.
- comparator Individual patients were randomized to either receive sitz baths or no sitz baths for 4 weeks in addition to oral psyllium husk.
- primaryOutcome Main outcome measures were validated pain scores and levels of satisfaction.
- result Although the pain score was lesser in the sitz bath group than in the control group, it failed to reach statistical significance.
- result There were no significant differences in fissure healing between the two groups over the 4-week study period.
- result However, patients in the sitz bath group reported better satisfaction levels than the control group (P < 0.01).
- harm two patients from sitz bath group developed perianal skin rash
ANZ J Surg · PMID 16916391 · Read it on PubMed ↗
Jensen 1986
Treatment of first episodes of acute anal fissure: prospective randomised study of lignocaine ointment versus hydrocortisone ointment or warm sitz baths plus bran
Faster relief, better healing than ointments.Randomised trialLow qualityRelated question
103 people3 weeks
sitz baths plus bran gave quicker symptom relief and the highest healing rate (87%) compared with hydrocortisone (82.4%) and lignocaine (60%)
Who was studied
adults with a first episode of acute anal fissure near the back passage
What they received
warm sitz baths combined with eating unprocessed bran
Compared with
lignocaine ointment or hydrocortisone ointment
Main outcome
symptom relief and whether the fissure healed after three weeks
Quality
it is a randomised trial but small, not blinded, combines sitz baths with a bran diet so the effect of baths alone can't be separated, and follow-up was only three weeks.
Limitations
sitz baths were combined with bran intake rather than tested alone, the trial was not blinded, and some patients were withdrawn for not following the protocol.
Taken word for word from the abstract
- n One hundred and three patients with an acute first episode of posterior anal fissure were randomised
- population One hundred and three patients with an acute first episode of posterior anal fissure
- intervention warm sitz baths combined with an intake of unprocessed bran
- comparator lignocaine ointment (n = 33) versus hydrocortisone ointment (n = 35)
- primaryOutcome After three weeks there was no difference in symptomatic relief among the three groups.
- result Patients treated with lignocaine, however, had significantly fewer healed fissures (60%) than patients treated with hydrocortisone (82.4%) or warm sitz baths and bran (87%).
Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) · PMID 3011180 · Read it on PubMed ↗

What actually helps, on this site

More about the condition:

Anal Fissure

All 11 studiesEvery study that answered the question, with its design, size and result.

The other 6 studiesEverything else the search returned, including anything retracted.

Freymond et al. 2018
[Proctological emergencies in pregnant women]
No evidence reported either way.Narrative reviewVery low qualityRelated question
size not given2018
the abstract only lists sitz baths as part of general conservative treatment; no healing outcome or comparison is reported
Who was studied
pregnant women with proctological problems including anal fissure
What they received
sitz baths, as one of several conservative measures mentioned
Quality
this is a general narrative review of pregnancy proctology that mentions sitz baths in passing without any study data, numbers, or outcomes to judge effectiveness.
Limitations
no original data, no defined outcome, no comparison group, and the population is limited to pregnant women rather than fissure patients generally.
Taken word for word from the abstract
- population Hemorrhoids affect up to 85 % of pregnant women during the last two trimesters. The maximum incidence for anal fissure is 20 %.
- intervention conservative measures (local anesthetics, sitz baths)
- result The treatment includes above all hygiene and dietary measures to prevent constipation and conservative measures (local anesthetics, sitz baths).
Rev Med Suisse · PMID 30091329 · Read it on PubMed ↗
Nelson et al. 2012
Non surgical therapy for anal fissure
No specific result reported.Meta-analysisVery low qualityRelated question
size not given2012
The review lists sitz baths as one of 17 agents studied across 75 trials, but it does not report any specific healing rate, comparison data, or outcome numbers for sitz baths alone.
Who was studied
adults and children with acute or chronic anal fissure
What they received
sitz baths (warm water soaking of the anal area)
Main outcome
whether the fissure healed (non-healing/persistence or recurrence) and side effects
Quality
This is a large Cochrane review, but it never separates out or reports actual results for sitz baths specifically, so no conclusion about sitz baths can be drawn from it.
Limitations
The abstract names sitz baths only as one of many agents included in the pooled set of trials; it gives no specific data, comparison group, or outcome figures for sitz baths on their own.
Taken word for word from the abstract
- population Chronic fissure, acute fissure and fissure in children are included in the review.
- intervention sitz baths
- primaryOutcome Dichotomous outcome measures included Non-healing of the fissure (a combination of persistence and recurrence), and Adverse events (including incontinence, headache, infection, anaphylaxis).
- result Seventeen agents were used (nitroglycerin ointment (GTN), isosorbide mono & dinitrate, Botulinum toxin (Botox), diltiazem, nifedipine (Calcium channel blockers or CCBs), hydrocortisone, lignocaine, bran, minoxidil, indoramin, clove oil, L-arginine, sitz baths, sildenafil, "healer cream" and placebo) as well as Sitz baths, anal dilators and surgical sphincterotomy.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev · PMID 22336789 · Read it on PubMed ↗
Gupta 2010
Supportive therapies in ano-rectal diseases--are they really useful?
No specific finding reported.Narrative reviewVery low qualityRelated question
size not given2010
The abstract does not report a specific finding on sitz baths for anal fissure healing; it only poses the question of whether such supportive therapies are beneficial or empirical and says it summarizes advantages and pitfalls.
Who was studied
people with common anal disorders including hemorrhoids, anal fissure and fistula
What they received
sitz baths (and other supportive therapies)
Compared with
none specified
Main outcome
whether supportive therapies are beneficial
Quality
This is a narrative review discussing general supportive therapies without presenting specific data, trial results, or numbers for sitz baths in anal fissure.
Limitations
The abstract does not describe any study design, data, or outcomes specific to sitz baths or anal fissure; it is a general discussion of supportive therapies across multiple anal conditions.
Taken word for word from the abstract
- population various ano-rectal pathologies
- intervention sitz baths
- primaryOutcome But are these supportive therapies really beneficial or they are just empirical?
- result This paper elaborates the various supportive therapies advocated in the common anal disorders like hemorrhoids, anal fissure and fistula and summarizes the advantages and pitfalls of these treatment additives.
- comparator apart from definitive treatment, various additional or supportive therapies are being advised
Acta Chir Iugosl · PMID 21066990 · Read it on PubMed ↗
Janicke et al. 1996
Anorectal disorders
Review claims sitz baths help, no data givenNarrative reviewVery low qualityRelated question
size not given1996
The review states most anal fissures are adequately treated with sitz baths, stool softeners, and analgesics, but gives no data, numbers, or comparison
Who was studied
people with anal fissures
What they received
sitz baths
Compared with
no comparator described (combined with stool softeners and analgesics)
Main outcome
healing or adequate treatment of anal fissure
Quality
This is a general narrative review for emergency physicians with no study data, numbers, or comparisons given for sitz baths specifically.
Limitations
No original data, study design, or outcome measures are provided; sitz baths are mentioned only as part of a combined medical approach without isolating their individual effect.
Taken word for word from the abstract
- population Anal fissures are one of the most common causes of anorectal pain.
- intervention Most anal fissures are adequately treated by a medical approach using sitz baths, stool softeners, and analgesics.
- primaryOutcome Most anal fissures are adequately treated by a medical approach using sitz baths, stool softeners, and analgesics.
- result Most anal fissures are adequately treated by a medical approach using sitz baths, stool softeners, and analgesics.
- comparator Most anal fissures are adequately treated by a medical approach using sitz baths, stool softeners, and analgesics.
Emerg Med Clin North Am · PMID 8921768 · Read it on PubMed ↗
North et al. 1996
The management of infectious and noninfectious anorectal complications in patients with leukemia
No fissure-specific result givenRetrospectiveVery low qualityRelated question
22 people1996
Overall, 79 (86 percent) of the 92 anorectal complications resolved in 68 of the 83 patients; outcomes were not broken out specifically for the 22 patients with anal fissures or for sitz baths alone
Who was studied
Leukemia patients in hospital who developed anal fissures as one of several anorectal complications
What they received
Sitz baths (combined with other nonoperative care such as antibiotics)
Compared with
Surgical intervention / no direct comparator isolating sitz baths alone
Main outcome
Resolution of anorectal complications without surgery
Quality
This is a retrospective chart review in immunocompromised leukemia patients that lumps anal fissures together with other anorectal problems and does not separate out sitz-bath outcomes for fissures specifically.
Limitations
Retrospective design, no control group, fissure outcomes not reported separately from other anorectal complications, and the population (leukemia patients undergoing cancer therapy) differs from the general population with anal fissures.
Taken word for word from the abstract
- population A retrospective review of the medical records of 83 patients with acute or chronic leukemia in whom anorectal disease developed during inpatient therapy for leukemia was performed
- n 22 patients with anal fissures
- intervention Nonoperative intervention in the form of systemic antibiotics and sitz baths is successful in the treatment of infectious anorectal complications.
- comparator Thirteen patients (16 percent) required surgical intervention, most commonly secondary to a perirectal abscess.
- primaryOutcome Overall, 79 (86 percent) of the 92 anorectal complications resolved in 68 of the 83 patients.
- result Overall, 79 (86 percent) of the 92 anorectal complications resolved in 68 of the 83 patients.
J Am Coll Surg · PMID 8843260 · Read it on PubMed ↗
Shub et al. 1978
Conservative treatment of anal fissure: an unselected, retrospective and continuous study
Unclear if sitz baths specifically helped.RetrospectiveVery low qualityRelated question
393 peopleapproximately five years
44% healed without surgery in 4-8 weeks, 8% had complications needing surgery, 27% recurrence rate
Who was studied
patients with anal fissures
What they received
conservative (non-surgical) treatment, not specified as sitz baths
Main outcome
healing without surgery
Quality
This is an old retrospective case series with no control group and no specific description of what 'conservative treatment' included, so it cannot show whether sitz baths themselves help.
Limitations
Retrospective, unselected, no comparison group, and the treatment is called 'conservative treatment' without specifying sitz baths as a distinct intervention.
Taken word for word from the abstract
- n Three hundred and ninety-three patients who had anal fissures were followed continuously for approximately five years.
- population Three hundred and ninety-three patients who had anal fissures
- intervention Conservative treatment of anal fissure
- primaryOutcome More than 44 per cent of them were cured nonsurgically within a four-to-eight-week period.
- result More than 44 per cent of them were cured nonsurgically within a four-to-eight-week period. There was an 8 per cent complication rate, consisting of abscesses and fistulas, necessitating surgical treatment. The recurrence rate following healing was 27 per cent
Dis Colon Rectum · PMID 738173 · Read it on PubMed ↗

How we searchedThe exact query, the date it ran, and what came back — so you can run it yourself.

Searched: PubMed · ClinicalTrials.gov · Crossref on 2026-10-26
The exact search — paste this into PubMed to repeat it: ("Fissure in Ano"[MeSH] OR "anal fissure"[tiab]) AND ("Baths"[MeSH] OR "sitz bath"[tiab] OR "sitz baths"[tiab] OR (warm[tiab] AND water[tiab] AND soak[tiab])); PubMed expanded that to: ("Fissure in Ano"[MeSH Terms] OR "anal fissure"[Title/Abstract]) AND ("Baths"[MeSH Terms] OR "sitz bath"[Title/Abstract] OR "sitz baths"[Title/Abstract] OR ("warm"[Title/Abstract] AND "water"[Title/Abstract] AND "soak"[Title/Abstract]))
What came back: 39 records found · 39 read · 11 answered the question
Included: Human, animal or laboratory studies reporting an outcome relevant to the question
Excluded: Records about a different condition or intervention
Studies of Topical nitrates (e.g. GTN ointment) — a different treatment from the one asked about
Studies of Topical calcium channel blockers (e.g. diltiazem, nifedipine) — a different treatment from the one asked about
Studies of Botulinum toxin injection — a different treatment from the one asked about
Studies of Lateral internal sphincterotomy — a different treatment from the one asked about
Studies of Stool softeners or fiber supplementation alone — a different treatment from the one asked about
Records reporting no outcome
Retracted publications, which are listed but excluded from every count
Limits: Details were read from abstracts, not full papers, so anything reported only in a paper's methods section is not captured here.
Fields were read from abstracts, not full text, so detail reported only in a paper's methods section is not captured.
Evidence strength is adapted from the GRADE framework. It is not a GRADE assessment and was not produced by a GRADE panel.

39records came back from the search
39were read
11actually answered the question

Risks and safetyReported side effects and who should be careful.

Two patients using sitz baths developed a mild skin rash around the anus in one trial.

Why people try itThe reasoning behind the question — not a claim that it works.

Doctors commonly suggest it as an easy first step before trying anything stronger.
Warm water can feel soothing on a painful, raw area.
It's cheap, doesn't need a prescription, and can be done at home.
It's a long-standing traditional remedy for anal and rectal pain.

Common questionsShort answers, drawn from the same studies.

Should I stop doing sitz baths for my fissure?: There's no need to stop. No trial found a serious harm from sitz baths, just a mild skin rash in two people in one study. They just don't appear to speed up healing on their own, based on the one direct trial.
Do sitz baths at least help with the pain?: The trials that measured pain mostly found no statistically significant difference, though some patients said they felt more comfortable or satisfied. One post-surgery trial found less burning after bowel movements with sitz baths.
What actually heals a fissure faster?: The trial that tested sitz baths directly gave fiber supplements to both groups, and healing was the same either way, which suggests the fiber may matter more than the water soak itself. This page only covers the evidence on sitz baths, so it can't settle what else works best.
Is it safe to keep doing sitz baths while the fissure heals?: The evidence suggests it's generally safe. One trial reported a mild skin rash in two patients, but no other harms were reported across the studies.

What has changedEvery re-check, and whether it changed the answer.

2026-10-26
Clear the 'Under re-review' backlog: rebuild every remaining first-method (ev-1) page under the current method. 2 new studies · 14 no longer retrieved · conclusion unclear → no meaningful benefit.
The conclusion changed.

This is information, not advice

This page summarises published research. It cannot tell you what is happening in your own body, and evidence changes. If something is bleeding, painful, or new, it is worth being looked at — that is a different question from the one on this page, and a better one to bring to a consultation.

Contact the office

Automated evidence review — PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, Crossref. Search strategy, grading rules and the checks that must pass before anything publishes were written by Allen Kamrava, MD, MBA, FACS, FASCRS, colon & rectal surgery, Beverly Hills. The pages themselves are compiled by software running that method and are not read one by one before publication — saying otherwise would be the one claim here that could not be checked.

Allen Kamrava, MD, MBA, FACS, FASCRS · 435 N. Bedford Dr., Suite 308, Beverly Hills, CA 90210 · 424.279.8222

Educational information — not medical advice.