Objectives: Optimal treatment of perianal abscess on the children is conflicting. The aim of the present study was toperform a retrospective research of paediatric patients below 1 year of age who were admitted into the paediatric surgery clinic due to perianal abscess and fistula-in-ano, and to present the treatment outcomes for perianal abscess andfistula-in-ano in comparison.Methods: The study was conducted by screening files of the patients below 1 year of age who have been followed-upand treated because of perianal abscess and fistula-in-ano in paediatric surgery clinic of our hospital between 2015and 2020.Results: There was not any statistically significant difference in the outpatient and inpatient groups admitted due toperianal abscess for laboratory tests, abscess location, and therapeutic procedure. The most common location of PAwas at 9 o'clock (n=15, 31%), 3 o'clock and 8 o'clock levels. Surgical drainage was implemented to 32 (68%) patients;15 (32%) patients were followed-up through conservative treatment without any surgical procedure. Fistulotomy wasperformed on nine (19.1%) patients who have not responded to conservative treatment for two weeks. There was notany adverse event or recurrent abscess developed after fistulotomy procedure.Conclusion: Although characteristics of PA and FA are well-known, treatment on the children is contradictory. Conservative treatment of PA includes sitz bath and being careful on local hygiene. Conservative treatment may be implemented on eligible paediatric patients diagnosed with PA. In the patients who do not respond to conservative treatment, sitz bath for the abscess with complete fluctuation, and basic drainage with or without topical anaesthesia arethe most common therapies for perianal abscess. In addition, considerable discussions about efforts to identify a fistuladuring abscess drainage are involved in the literature.