Karydakis procedure versus Limberg flap for treatment of pilonidal sinus: an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Midline and off-midline wound closure methods after surgical treatment for pilonidal sinus

BACKGROUND

Pilonidal sinus disease is a common and debilitating condition. Surgical treatment remains the mainstay for managing chronic disease, with options including midline and off-midline wound closure methods. However, the optimal approach remains uncertain. Recent developments in tension-free midline techniques require further exploration.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of midline and off-midline wound closure methods for pilonidal sinus, and to determine the optimal off-midline flap procedures.

SEARCH METHODS

In June 2022, we searched the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL Plus EBSCO, and clinical trials registries. We also scanned the reference lists of included studies, as well as reviews, meta-analyses, and health technology reports. We applied no language, publication date, or study setting restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel RCTs involving participants undergoing midline closure without flap techniques and off-midline closure for pilonidal sinus treatment. We excluded quasi-experimental studies and studies that enroled participants presenting with an abscess.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard Cochrane methodology. The critical outcomes included wound healing (time to wound healing, proportion of wounds healed), recurrence rate, wound infection, wound dehiscence, time to return to work, and quality of life. We assessed biases in these outcomes utilising the Cochrane risk of bias 2 tool and appraised evidence certainty via the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 33 studies with 3667 analysed participants. The median or average age of the participants across the included studies ranged from 21.0 to 34.2 years, with a predominant male representation. Geographically, the trials were primarily conducted in the Middle East. We identified nine intervention comparisons. In this abstract, we focus on and present the summarised findings for the three primary comparisons. Off-midline closure versus conventional midline closure Off-midline closure probably reduces the time to wound healing (mean difference (MD) -5.23 days, 95% confidence interval (CI) -7.55 to -2.92 days; 3 studies, 300 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). However, there may be little to no difference between the two methods in the proportion of wounds healed (100% versus 88.5%, risk ratio (RR) 1.13, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.39; 2 studies, 207 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Off-midline closure probably results in lower rates of recurrence (1.5% versus 6.8%, RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.45; 13 studies, 1492 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and wound infection (3.8% versus 11.7%, RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.49; 13 studies, 1568 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and may lower rates of wound dehiscence (3.9% versus 8.9%, RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.71; 11 studies, 1389 participants; low-certainty evidence). Furthermore, off-midline closure may result in a reduced time to return to work (MD -3.72 days, 95% CI -6.11 to -1.33 days; 6 studies, 820 participants; low-certainty evidence). There were no data available for quality of life. Off-midline closure versus tension-free midline closure Off-midline closure may reduce the time to wound healing (median 14 days in off-midline closure versus 51 days in tension-free midline closure; 1 study, 116 participants; low-certainty evidence) and increase wound healing rates at three months (94.7% versus 76.4%, RR 1.24, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.46; 1 study, 115 participants; low-certainty evidence), but may result in little to no difference in rates of recurrence (5.4% versus 7.8%, RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.61; 6 studies, 551 participants; very low-certainty evidence), wound infection (2.8% versus 6.4%, RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.17; 6 studies, 559 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and wound dehiscence (2.5% versus 3.0%, RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.17 to 3.84; 3 studies, 250 participants; very low-certainty evidence) compared to tension-free midline closure. Furthermore, off-midline closure may result in longer time to return to work compared to tension-free midline closure (MD 3.00 days, 95% CI 1.52 to 4.48 days; 1 study, 60 participants; low-certainty evidence). There were no data available for quality of life. Karydakis flap versus Limberg flap Karydakis flap probably results in little to no difference in time to wound healing compared to Limberg flap (MD 0.36 days, 95% CI -1.49 to 2.22; 6 studies, 526 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Compared to Limberg flap, Karydakis flap may result in little to no difference in the proportion of wounds healed (80.0% versus 66.7%, RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.86; 1 study, 30 participants; low-certainty evidence), recurrence rate (5.1% versus 4.5%, RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.61 to 2.14; 9 studies, 890 participants; low-certainty evidence), wound infection (7.9% versus 5.1%, RR 1.55, 95% CI 0.90 to 2.68; 8 studies, 869 participants; low-certainty evidence), wound dehiscence (7.4% versus 6.2%, RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.41 to 3.50; 7 studies, 776 participants; low-certainty evidence), and time to return to work (MD -0.23 days, 95% CI -5.53 to 5.08 days; 6 studies, 541 participants; low-certainty evidence). There were no data available for quality of life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This Cochrane review examines the midline and off-midline wound closure options for pilonidal sinus, predominantly based on young adult studies. Off-midline flap procedures demonstrate there may be benefits over conventional midline closure for pilonidal sinus, with various off-midline flap techniques. When off-midline flap closures were compared to tension-free midline closure, low-certainty evidence indicated there may be improved wound healing and increased time to return to work for off-midline closure, whilst very low-certainty evidence indicated there may be no evidence of a difference in other outcomes. There may be no evidence of an advantage found amongst the off-midline techniques evaluated. The choice of either procedure is likely to be based on a clinician's preference, experience, patient characteristics, and the patients' preferences. To more accurately determine the benefits and potential harms of these closure techniques, further large-scale and meticulously-designed trials are essential. Specifically, there is a pressing need for more studies addressing the paediatric population, in addition to adult studies.

Simplified and modified Limberg flap plus vacuum-assisted closure for treatment of sacrococcygeal pilonidal sinus disease

BACKGROUND

Pilonidal sinus disease (PSD), a chronic inflammatory disease, affects the sacrococcygeal soft tissue, especially in young adults. The ideal treatment for PSD remains divergence. This study evaluated the application of a simplified modified Limberg flap combined with vacuum-assisted closure for treating PSD.

METHODS

This prospective study was conducted from 1 June 2017 to 31 March 2022 in Changhai Hospital, Naval Military Medical University, Shanghai, China. The study included 88 male patients (91.7%) and 8 female patients (8.3%). The 96 patients ranged in age from 15 to 34 years (mean ± SD, 23 ± 4.4). Under general anaesthesia, all patients underwent simplified modified Limberg flap reconstruction with vacuum-assisted closure. The patient's weight, surgical time, extubation time, hospital stay, time to return to normal life or work, wound infection, wound dehiscence and recurrence rate were recorded. The visual analogue scale (VAS) score and the Vancouver scar score were used to score patients' pain and scars in the surgical area.

RESULTS

The volume of resected diseased tissue was 13.5-120 (mean ± SD, 34.993 ± 24.406) cm2 . The average surgical time during the treatment period was 97.68 ± 18.72 min, and the average extubation time was (6.36 ± 1.55) days, the mean hospital stay was 19.4 days; no patients were lost to follow-up. None of the patients experienced post-operative recurrence, wound infection, seroma or hematoma. Six patients (6.3%) experienced wound dehiscence at the flap tip around the natal cleft. The mean time to the resumption of daily activities was 26.3 days. The average VAS pain score was (6.00 ± 1.53) points, and the average Vancouver scar score was (5.96 ± 1.51) points, 12 patients (12.5%) were dissatisfied with their aesthetic results, and the average beauty satisfaction score is (6.64 ± 1.28) points.

CONCLUSIONS

Simplified modified Limberg flap reconstruction with vacuum-assisted closure surgery is an effective and innovative method for the treatment of PSD, with a low recurrence rate and rapid recovery.

Pilonidal Disease: To Flap or Not to Flap

Pilonidal disease is an acquired disease caused by infected hair follicles imbedded in the midline gluteal area. The diagnosis is made based on clinic examination. Treatment is based on disease severity with minimal invasive techniques like the Bascom I procedure, Moshe Gibs procedure, or video-assisted pilonidal sinus ablation best suited for less complicated cases. However, for recalcitrant diseases, more advanced techniques are needed such as the Karydakis, Limberg, or V-Y advancement flaps.

Cleft closure (the Bascom cleft lift) for 714 patients-treatment of choice for complex and recurrent pilonidal disease (a cohort study)

AIM

Pilonidal disease is a benign condition that affects mainly the young. In existing literature, there is no consensus for best treatment, with multiple operative techniques described, some complex, resulting in a high proportion of failure and/or morbidity. The cleft closure (or cleft lift) described by Bascom and Bascom (Arch Surg, 137, 2002, 1146-50), by comparison, is a simple operation, resulting in healing in the majority and good cosmesis.

METHOD

This is a single surgeon series, with the aim of evaluating outcomes for consecutive patients who underwent cleft closure surgery at two centres (St Mark's Hospital, London, and Queen Alexandra Hospital, Portsmouth) between 1995 and 2021 for either extensive, complex or recurrent pilonidal disease. Primary study outcomes that were measured included rate of primary healing, time to complete healing and rate of recurrence.

RESULTS

Some 714 patients had a cleft closure of whom 656 had documented follow-up. Primary healing occurred in 60.7% (n = 398) rising to 88.5% by 12 weeks (n = 562) and 91.8% by 16 weeks. The remaining patients healed over the following weeks with only 19 wounds failing to heal completely (3%), requiring further surgery to achieve healing. After complete healing 5.3% of patients developed recurrent disease at a median of 12 months.

CONCLUSION

Cleft closure is an effective operation for pilonidal disease. Overall, 97% of patients healed without further surgery. A 3% failure rate and 5.3% recurrence rate were observed. This technique could be considered as an alternative procedure to complex flaps or midline excision, in extensive, recurrent and unhealed pilonidal disease.

Progress in the surgical treatment of sacrococcygeal pilonidal sinus: a review

BACKGROUND

A pilonidal sinus (PS) is an acquired disease resulting from recurrent infections and chronic inflammation. A PS involving the sacrococcyx is referred to as a sacrococcygeal PS (SPS). An SPS is a rare chronic infectious disease for which surgery is a good choice. The incidence of SPS has gradually increased worldwide in recent years. However, surgeons have not reached a consensus on the preferred surgical approach for SPS. The authors performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to analyze differences in the efficacy of different surgical approaches for the treatment of SPS.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in the PubMed database covering the period from 1 January 2003, to 28 February 2023. The primary outcome parameters were recurrence and infection. Finally, statistical analysis (meta-analysis) was carried out using RevMan 5.4.1 software. In addition, we systematically reviewed the latest progress in the surgical treatment of SPS over the past 20 years, especially as reported in the past 3 years.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven articles, 54 studies, and 3612 participants were included in this meta-analysis. The recurrence rate following the midline closure (MC) technique was much higher than that of other techniques. Among the techniques analyzed, the differences between MC and Limberg flap (LF), and between MC and marsupialization were statistically significant [ P =0.0002, risk ratio (RR)=6.15, 95% CI 2.40, 15.80; P =0.01, RR=12.70, 95% CI 1.70, 95.06]. The recurrence rate of open healing was higher than that of the Karydakis flap (KF) technique, and the difference was statistically significant ( P =0.02, RR=6.04, 95% CI 1.37, 26.55). Most of the results comparing MC with other techniques suggested that the former had a higher infection rate, and the difference between MC and LF was statistically significant ( P =0.0005, RR=4.14, 95% CI 1.86, 9.23). Comparison between KF and LF, modified LF and KF showed that the differences were not statistically significant in terms of recurrence and infection ( P ≥0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

There are various surgical treatment options for SPS, including incision and drainage, excision of diseased tissue with primary closure and secondary healing, and minimally invasive surgery. It is still not possible to determine which surgical technique should be considered the gold standard for treatment, as even the results of different researchers using the same operation method are conflicting. But what is certain is that the midline closure technique has a much higher incidence of postoperative recurrence and infection than other techniques. Therefore, the anorectal surgeon should formulate the most suitable individualized plan for the patient based on a comprehensive evaluation of the patient's wishes, appearance of the SPS, and the professional ability of the surgeon.

Management of Pilonidal Disease: A Review

Importance

The management of pilonidal disease continues to be a challenge due to high rates of recurrence and treatment-associated morbidity.

Observations

There is a heterogeneous repertoire of treatment modalities used in the management of pilonidal disease and wide practice variation among clinicians. Available treatment options vary considerably in their level of invasiveness, associated morbidity and disability, risks of complications, and effectiveness at preventing disease recurrence. Conservative nonoperative management strategies, including persistent improved hygiene, depilation, and lifestyle modification, focus on disease prevention and minimization of disease activity. Epilation techniques using both laser and intense pulse light therapy are also used as primary and adjunct treatment modalities. Other nonoperative treatment modalities include phenol and fibrin injection to promote closure of pilonidal sinuses. The traditional operative management strategy for pilonidal disease involves excision of affected tissue paired with a variety of closure types including primary midline closure, primary off-midline closure techniques (ie, Karydakis flap, Limberg flap, Bascom cleft lift), and healing by secondary intention. There has been a recent shift toward more minimally invasive operative approaches including sinusectomy (ie, trephination or Gips procedure) and endoscopic approaches. Overall, the current evidence supporting the different treatment options is limited by study quality with inconsistent characterization of disease severity and use of variable definitions and reporting of treatment-associated outcomes across studies.

Conclusions and Relevance

Pilonidal disease is associated with significant physical and psychosocial morbidity. Optimal treatments will minimize disease and treatment-associated morbidity. There is a need for standardization of definitions used to characterize pilonidal disease and its outcomes to develop evidence-based treatment algorithms.

The application of the Limberg flap repair technique in the surgical treatment of pilonidal sinus disease

Pilonidal sinus disease (PNSD) challenged surgeons for decades. Limberg flap repair (LFR) is a common treatment for PNSD. The purpose of this study was to observe the effect and risk factors of LFR in PNSD. A retrospective study was conducted on the PNSD patients who visited two medical centers and four departments in the People's Liberation Army General Hospital and were taking LFR treatment between 2016 and 2022. The risk factors, the effect of the operation, and complications were observed. The effects of known risk factors on the surgical results were compared. There were 37 PNSD patients: male/female ratio of 35:2, average age: 25.1 ± 7.9 years. Average BMI: 25.2 ± 4.0 kg/m² , average wound healing time: 15.4 ± 3.4 days. 30 patients (81.0%) healed in stage one and 7 (16.3%) had postoperative complications. Only 1 patient (2.7%) had a recurrence while others were healed after dressing-changing. There was no significant difference in age, BMI, preoperative debridement history, preoperative sinus classification, Wound area, Negative pressure drainage tube, prone time (<3d) and treatment effect. Squat defecate and premature defecation were associated with treatment effect, and they were independent predictors of treatment effect in the multivariate analysis. LFR has a stable therapeutic outcome. Compared with other skin flaps, the therapeutic effect of this flap is not significantly different, but the design is simple and is not affected by the known risk factors before operation. However, it is necessary to avoid the influence of two independent risk factors, squatting defecation and premature defecation, on the therapeutic effect.

Primary Closure of Pilonidal Sinus With Slide-Swing Skin Flap Compared With the Secondary Closure: A Single-Blinded Randomized Controlled Trial

INTRODUCTION

There are many surgical approaches for sacrococcygeal pilonidal sinus disease (PSD) therapy, ranging from wide excision repair to less morbid excisions with primary/flap closure. The off-midline flaps, which shift the incision line away from the midline natal cleft, have been associated with lower recurrence rates than the conventional mid-line closure techniques. This single-blinded randomized controlled trial aims to compare the short/long-term efficacy and outcome of the slide-swing flap technique with the conventional secondary wound closure.

METHOD AND MATERIALS

This study was a prospective randomized controlled trial conducted on patients with PSD. Patients were assigned into two groups: secondary closure (control) and slide-swing flap (trial). Patients were advised to visit the surgical clinic two times weekly for the two weeks after the operation for at least six months.

RESULTS

In this study, 100 patients were enrolled. They were assigned into two groups of control, and trial. The mean age of all participants was 29.15 ± 8.36 years old (age range: 18-62 years old). The mean operation time was 39.65 ± 12.63 for both groups, with the control group being 29.70 ± 7.71 and the swing flap group 46.90 ± 7.81. Patient visual analog scale (VAS) scores in both groups revealed that the trial group was associated with lower VAS scores compared with patients who underwent secondary closure (p-value = 0.006). Also, the trial group demonstrated a higher rate of healing, better cosmetic outcomes, and quicker recovery time compared with the controls.

CONCLUSION

Compared with secondary closure, the slide-swing flap was associated with excellent cosmetic outcomes, disease recurrence, and recovery time. Also, the post-operative complications were significantly lower compared with the traditional method.