ObjectiveTo analyze the effect of anal fistula clip (AFC) in the treatment of anal fistula, and to evaluate its safety. MethodsA historical cohort study method was conducted. Eighty-three patients with glandular transsphincteric anal fistula in the Xuzhou Central Hospital from September 2018 to May 2021 were collected, of which 42 patients underwent the AFC treatment (AFC group), 41 patients underwent the endorectal advancement flap (ERAF) treatment (ERAF group). The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, visual analogue scale (VAS) score of anus pain on postoperative day 1, 3, and 7, wound healing time, Wexner incontinence score of anal function on postoperative month 6, and clinical efficacy (healing and failure) were compared between the two groups. ResultsThe operation was successfully completed in both groups. The operation time and intraoperative blood loss in the AFC group were shorter or less than those in the ERAF group (P<0.05). No complications such as internal opening infection and bleeding occurred in the two groups. There were no statistical differences in the VAS score of postoperative anus pain at all time point between the two groups (P>0.05). The median follow-up time was 22 months. There was no statistical difference in the wound healing time between the two groups (P>0.05). The Wexner score of anal function in the AFC group was lower than that in the ERAF group (P<0.05), and there was no statistical difference between after operation and before operation (Z=–1.751, P=0.089) in the AFC group, while that in the ERAF group after operation was higher than before operation (Z=–1.859, P=0.014). The healing rate had no statistical difference between the AFC group and ERAF group (85.7% versus 77.5%, χ2=0.925, P=0.336). Conclusion From the results of this study, the AFC is safe and effective in treatment of anal fistula, with the advantages of relatively simple operation, less bleeding during operation, lighter postoperative pain, and good protection of anal function.