Dergiler / Journal of Basic and Clinical Health Sciences / 2021 / Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 3

Comparison of Surgical Methods in Sacrococcygeal Pilonidal Sinus Treatment

Sayfa
126–131
Yayın Tarihi
2022-10-19
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

However, a significant difference was found between the treatment methods in terms of length of hospital stay, presence of drainage, recurrence and complications (p

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Purpose: Although many conservative and surgical methods have been described in the treatment of sacrococcygeal pilonidal sinus, which is a common disease of the sacrococcygeal region, affecting especially young men, recurrence rates are still high and the search for ideal treatment continues.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Material and method: The data of 184 patients who were operated between 2018 and 2020 were retrospectively evaluated.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:However, a significant difference was found between the treatment methods in terms of length of hospital stay, presence of drainage, recurrence and complications (p
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:2018 Verileri
⚙️Değişkenler:Pilonidal sinus · Recurrence · Limberg flap

Abstract

Purpose: Although many conservative and surgical methods have been described in the treatment of sacrococcygeal pilonidal sinus, which is a common disease of the sacrococcygeal region, affecting especially young men, recurrence rates are still high and the search for ideal treatment continues. The aim of the study is to compare the primary closure, Limberg and Karydakis flap methods for pilonidal sinus surgery in terms of wound healing, complications and recurrence and to present the results accordingly. Material and method: The data of 184 patients who were operated between 2018 and 2020 were retrospectively evaluated. Patient data on age, gender, comorbidity, Body Mass Index (BMI), smoking, recurrence, history of preoperative abscess drainage, surgical methods, length of hospital stay, postoperative drain, recurrence and complications were evaluated. Results: No statistically significant difference was found between the treatment methods in terms of age, gender, Body Mass Index, and smoking (p>0.005). A statistically significant difference was found between the treatment methods in terms of reoperation for recurrence and preoperative abscess drainage (p = 0.012) (p = 0.044). However, a significant difference was found between the treatment methods in terms of length of hospital stay, presence of drainage, recurrence and complications (p

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

Dasdemir, Y., Cantay, H. (2022). Comparison of Surgical Methods in Sacrococcygeal Pilonidal Sinus Treatment. Journal of Basic and Clinical Health Sciences, Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 3, 126–131. https://ajindex.com/articles/560529

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (14)

  1. Iesalnieks I, Ommer A, Petersen S, Doll D, Herold A. German national guideline on the management of pilonidal disease. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2016; 401: 599-609
  2. Strong E, Callaghan T, Beal E, et al. Patient decision-making and regret in pilonidal sinus surgery: a mixed-methods study. Colorectal Disease. 2021; 00: 1–12
  3. Kallis MP, Maloney C, Lipskar AM. Management of pilonidal disease. Curr Opin Pediatr. 2018; 30: 411-416
  4. Johnson EK. Expert Commentary on Pilonidal Disease: Management and Definitive Treatment. Dis Colon Rectum. 2018; 61: 777-779
  5. Emile SH, Khan SM, Barsom SH, Wexner SD. Karydakis procedure versus Limberg flap for treatment of pilonidal sinus: an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. International Journal of Colorectal Disease 2021
  6. Çiftci F, Abdurrahman I. A different disease: extra sacrococcygeal pilonidal sinuses etiopathogenesis. Int J Clin Exp Med. 2015; 8: 11567-11571
  7. Duman K, Gırgın M, Harlak A. Prevalence of sacrococcygeal pilonidal di-sease in Turkey. Asian J Surg. 2017; 40: 434-437
  8. Gordon KJ, Hunt TM. Osteomyelitis as a complication of a pilonidal sinus. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2016; 31: 155-156
  9. Payne CJ, Walker TWM, Karcher AM, Kingsmore DB, Byrne DS. Are routine microbiological investigations indicated in the manage-ment of non-perianal cutaneous abscesses? Surgeon. 2008; 6: 204-206
  10. Bolandparvaz S, Moghadam DP, Salahi R, et al. Evaluation of the risk factors of pilonidalsinus: a sing-le center experience. Turk J Gastroenterol. 2012; 23: 535-537
  11. Doll D, Brengelmann I, Schober P, Ommer A, Bosche F, Papalois AE et al. Rethinking the causes of pilonidal sinus disease: a matched cohort study. Scientifc Reports. 2021; 11: 6210 12. Ekici U, Kanlioz M, Ferhatoglu MF, Kartal A. A comparative analysis of four different surgical methods for treatment of sacrococcygeal pilonidal sinus. Asian Journal of Surgery. 2019; 42: 907-913
  12. Keshvari A, Keramati MR, Fazeli MS, Kazemeini A, Nouritaromlou MK. Risk factors for complications and recurrence after the Karydakis flap. Journal of Surgical Research. 2016; 204: 55-60
  13. Calis H, Guler Y, Sengul S, Karabulut Z. The effects of perioperative antibiotherapy on surgical site infections in sacrococcygeal pilonidal sinus treated with rhomboid excision and Limberg transposition procedure. Int Wound J. 2019; 16: 974–978
  14. Demiryas S, Donmez T. Could Early Postoperative Complications be considered a