SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Türk Kolon ve Rektum Hastalıkları Dergisi / 2021 / Cilt: 31 - Sayı: 4

Recurrence is not the Only Problem with Sacrococcygeal Pilonidal Sinus Disease: A Comparison between Microsinusectomy and Limberg Flap Technique

Sakrokoksigeal Pilonidal Sinüs Hastalığında Tek Sorun Nüks Değil; Mikrosinüsektomi ve Limberg Flep Tekniklerinin Karşılaştırılması

Ersin Öztürk
Barış GÜLCÜ
Pages
286–290
Publication Date
2022-11-06
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The median operating times (60 vs. 18 minutes; p

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aim: The aim of this study was to compare Limberg flap technique (LF) with microsinusectomy technique (MS) for the treatment of sacrococcygeal pilonidal sinus disease (SPS), in terms of early postoperative outcomes.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Method: Ninety-six patients who underwent LF or MS for SPS at two different centers between October 2017 and October 2018 were included.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The median operating times (60 vs. 18 minutes; p
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2017 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Aim: The aim of this study was to compare Limberg flap technique (LF) with microsinusectomy technique (MS) for the treatment of sacrococcygeal pilonidal sinus disease (SPS), in terms of early postoperative outcomes. Method: Ninety-six patients who underwent LF or MS for SPS at two different centers between October 2017 and October 2018 were included. The patients were evaluated retrospectively. The primary endpoints comprised of the duration of incapacity for work and postoperative patient’s comfort and capabilities, while the secondary endpoints included postoperative complications, first-year satisfaction, and recurrence rates. Results: The demographic data were similar in both LF and MS groups. The median operating times (60 vs. 18 minutes; p

Özet

Amaç: Bu çalışmada, sakrokoksigeal pilonidal sinüs hastalığının (SPS) tedavisinde Limberg flep (LF) tekniği ile mikrosinüsektomi (MS) tekniğinin erken dönem postoperatif sonuçlarının karşılaştırması amaçlandı. Yöntem: Ekim 2017 ile Ekim 2018 arasında farklı iki merkezde SPS için LF ve MS uygulanan 96 hasta dahil edildi. Hastalar geriye dönük olarak değerlendirildi. Çalışmada birincil sonlanım; iş göremezlik zamanı, ameliyat sonrası hasta konforu ve rahatlığı; ikincil sonlanım noktaları ise postoperatif komplikasyonlar, birinci yıl hasta memnuniyeti ve nüks oranlarıydı. Bulgular: Demografik veriler her iki grupta da benzerdi. Ortanca ameliyat süresi (60 dakika vs 18 dakika; p

🔖

Cite This Article

Öztürk, E., GÜLCÜ, B. (2022). Recurrence is not the Only Problem with Sacrococcygeal Pilonidal Sinus Disease: A Comparison between Microsinusectomy and Limberg Flap Technique. Türk Kolon ve Rektum Hastalıkları Dergisi, Cilt: 31 - Sayı: 4, 286–290. https://ajindex.com/articles/634508

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Käser SA, Zengaffinen R, Uhlmann M, Glaser C, Maurer CA. Primary wound closure with a Limberg flap vs. secondary wound healing after excision of a pilonidal sinus: a multicentre randomised controlled study. Int J Colorectal Dis 2015;30:97-103.
  2. Doll D, Matevossian E, Hoenemann C, Hoffmann S. Incision and drainage preceding definite surgery achieves lower 20-year longterm recurrence rate in 583 primary pilonidal sinus surgery patients. J J Dtsch Dermatol Ges 2013;11:60-64.
  3. Kayaalp C, Aydin C. Review of phenol treatment in sacrococcygeal pilonidal disease. Tech Coloproctol 2009;13:189-193.
  4. Keshvari A, Keramati MR, Fazeli MS, Kazemeini A, Meysamie A, Nouritaromlou MK. Karydakis flap versus excision-only technique in pilonidal disease. J Surg Res 2015;198:260-266.
  5. Irkörücü O, Erdem H, Reyhan E. The best therapy for pilonidal disease: which management for which type? World J Surg 2012;36:691-692.
  6. Petersen S, Koch R, Stelzner S, Wendlandt T-P, Ludwig K. Primary closure techniques in chronic pilonidal sinus: a survey of the results of different surgical approaches. Dis Colon Rectum 2002;45:1458-1467.
  7. McCallum IJ, King PM, Bruce J. Healing by primary closure versus open healing after surgery for pilonidal sinus: systematic review and metaanalysis. BMJ 2008;336:868-871.
  8. Shabbir J, Chaudhary BN, Britton DC. Management of sacrococcygeal pilonidal sinus disease: a snapshot of current practice. Int J Colorectal Dis 2011;26:1619-1620.
  9. Rahmani N, Gholipour Baradari A, Yazdi SM-JH, Firouzian A, Hashemi SA, Fazli M, Sadeghian I. Pilonidal Sinus Operations Performed Under Local Anesthesia versus the General Anesthesia: Clinical Trial Study. Glob J Health Sci 2016;8:53531. Schmittner MD, Dieterich S, Gebhart V, Weiss C, Burmeister MA, Bussen DG, Viergutz T. Randomised clinical trial of pilonidal sinus operations performed in the prone position underspinal anaesthesia with hyperbaric bupivacaine 0.5 % versus total intravenous anaesthesia. Int J Colorectal Dis 2012;28:873-880.
  10. Jamal A, Shamim M, Hashmi F, Qureshi MI. Open excision with secondary healing versus rhomboid excision with Limberg transposition flap in the management of sacrococcygeal pilonidal disease. J Pak Med Assoc 2009;59:157-160.
  11. Testini M, Piccinni G, Miniello S, Venere BD, Lissidini G, Nicolardi V, Bonomo GM. Treatment of chronic pilonidal sinus with local anaesthesia: a randomized trial of closed compared with open technique. Colorectal Dis 2001;3:427-430.
  12. Ersoy OF, Karaca S, Kayaoglu HA, Ozkan N, Celik A, Oz