Classical Limberg versus classical Karydakis flaps for pilonidal disease- an updated systematic review and 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.

Endoscopic Pilonidal Sinus Treatment: Preliminary Results, Learning Curve and Comparison with Standard Open Approach

Background: Pilonidal sinus (PNS) is a common disease which can lead to complications including infection and abscess formation. Different surgical approaches have been suggested, based on primary or secondary wound closure intention healing or endoscopic treatment (EPSiT). The aim of this study is to verify the superior outcomes of EPSiT, especially in comparison with the traditional open approach, and discuss the operators' learning curve. Methods: A retrospective study was conducted identifying all the patients who underwent surgical treatment for PNS with EPSiT technique between 2019 and 2022 and with open technique between 2002 and 2022. We divided patients in two groups: open procedure (group 1) and EPSiT (group 2). We considered a p value < 0.05 as statistically significant. Results: The mean operative time was 58.6 ± 23.7 min for group 1 and 42.8 ± 17.4 min for group 2 (p < 0.01). The mean hospital stay was 2.6 ± 1.7 days for group 1 patients and of 0.8 ± 0.4 days for group 2 (p < 0.01). Complete healing was obtained in 18.7 ± 5.6 days for group 1 and 38.3 ± 23.5 days for group 2 (p < 0.01). Recurrences were of 23.4% for group 1 and 5.4% for group 2 (p = 0.03). Conclusions: EPSiT is a minimally invasive and effective approach for the treatment of pilonidal cyst that can be safely performed in pediatric patients with promising results concerning aesthetic outcome and pain control, and with a rapid and less complicated recovery compared to traditional open procedures.

Surgery for pilonidal sinus disease in Norway: training, attitudes and preferences-a survey among Norwegian surgeons

BACKGROUND

Pilonidal sinus disease (PSD) is frequently observed in young adults. There is no wide consensus on optimal treatment in the literature, and various procedures are used in clinical practice. The objective of this study was to assess current practice, experience, training, and attitudes towards PSD surgery among Norwegian surgeons.

METHODS

An online survey on PSD surgery was created and sent to all members of the Norwegian Surgical Association. Categorical data were reported as frequencies and percentages.

RESULTS

Most currently practicing Norwegian surgeons used the Bascom's cleft lift (93.2%) or minimally invasive procedures (55.4%). Midline excisions with primary closure (19.7%) or secondary healing (22.4%) were still used by some surgeons, though. Most surgeons had received training in PSD surgery supervised by a specialist, but only about half of them felt sufficiently trained. The surgeons generally performed few PSD operations per year. Many considered PSD as a condition of low surgical status and this patient group as underprioritized.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that PSD surgery in Norway has been moving away from midline excisions and towards off-midline flap procedures and minimally invasive techniques. PSD and its treatment have a low status among many Norwegian surgeons. This study calls for attention to this underprioritized group of patients and shows the need for consensus in PSD treatment such as development of national guidelines in Norway. Further investigation on training in PSD and the role of supervision is needed.

Pit picking vs. Limberg flap vs. primary open method to treat pilonidal sinus disease - A cohort of 327 consecutive patients

Background

Minimally invasive methods in pilonidal sinus disease (PSD) surgery are becoming standard. Although long-term results are available for some techniques, long-term outcome data of patients after pit picking is lacking. We aimed at investigating perioperative and long-term outcomes of patients undergoing pit picking, Limberg flap or primary open surgery to treat PSD.

Methods

In a single-centre observational study, we evaluated the outcomes of 327 consecutive patients undergoing PSD surgery between 2011 and 2020.

Results

PSD had recurred in 22% of Limberg flap patients and 62% of pit picking patients at 5 years (p=0.0078; log rank test). Previous pilonidal surgeries, smoking, body mass index, immunodeficiency, and diabetes did not significantly influence the long-term recurrence rate. Primary open treatment was performed for 72% of female patients presenting with primary disease.

Conclusions

Due to its especially dismal long-term results, pit picking should be abandoned, and Limberg flap should be promoted instead, even for primary disease and in females.

German National Guideline on the management of pilonidal disease: update 2020

BACKGROUND

The present German National Guideline is an updated version of previous Guideline published in 2014. It aims to compare various treatment methods and to assist physicians with evidence-based recommendations.

METHODS

Systemic literature review.

RESULTS

Three types of disease manifestation could be differentiated: asymptomatic disease, an acute abscess, and the chronic pilonidal disease. At present, there is no treatment method fulfilling all desired criteria: simple, painless procedure associated with rapid wound healing, and low recurrence rate. Thus, treatment modality should be tailored to disease manifestation and extent.

CONCLUSION

Asymptomatic pilonidal disease should not be treated. A pilonidal abscess should be unroofed. After resolution of the acute inflammation, the disease should be treated definitely. As for today, sinus excision is the standard treatment of the chronic pilonidal disease. Wide excision and open treatment of chronic disease is a safe procedure which, however, leads to prolonged secondary healing and time off-work, as well as to considerable recurrence rate. The extent of excision should be as limited as possible. Excision and midline wound closure is associated with impaired outcomes. Today, it has become obsolete. Minimally invasive procedures (e.g., pit picking surgery) represent a treatment option for chronic pilonidal disease. However, the recurrence rate is higher compared to excision procedures. Nevertheless, they may be used for small primary disease. Off-midline procedures should be used for disease not suitable for minimally invasive treatments. The Limberg flap and the Karydakis procedure are two best described methods which are associated with similar short- and long-term results.

Consensus statement of the Italian society of colorectal surgery (SICCR): management and treatment of pilonidal disease

Pilonidal disease (PD) is a relatively common, benign but challenging condition of the natal cleft. This consensus statement was drawn up by a panel of surgeons, identified by the Italian Society of Colorectal Surgery (SICCR) as having a “special interest” in PD, with the aim of recommending the best therapeutic options according to currently available scientific evidence. A three-step modified-Delphi process was adopted, implying: (1) choice of the panelists; (2) development of a discussion outline and of target issues; and (3) a detailed systematic review of the current literature. The agreement/disagreement level was scored on a five-point Likert scale as follows: “A + : strongly agree; A–: agree; N: unsure/no opinion; D–: disagree; D + : strongly disagree. Each panelist contributed to the production of this manuscript, and the final recommendations were reviewed by the Clinical Practice Guidelines Committee.

A mapping review of sacrococcygeal pilonidal sinus disease

BACKGROUND

Pilonidal sinus is a hole in the natal cleft which may cause severe pain and become infected. The evidence base for management of pilonidal sinus is said to be poor quality, poorly focused and rapidly proliferating. We undertook a systematic mapping review to provide a broad overview of the field and support the identification of research priorities.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, and EMBASE from inception to 22nd Nov 2020 for primary research studies focused on the management of pilonidal sinus. We extracted data on study design and categorised studies under five major headings ('non-surgical treatment', 'surgical treatment', 'aftercare' and 'other'), producing frequency counts for different study designs. Gaps in research were identified from published systematic reviews and tabulated.

RESULTS

We identified 983 eligible studies, of which 36 were systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses; 121 were randomised controlled trials), and 826 observational studies of various design. The majority of studies evaluated surgical techniques (n = 665), or adjuvant medical interventions (n = 98). The literature on wound care has developed most recently, and the evidence base includes 30% randomised controlled trials. Gaps analysis highlighted comparison of surgical techniques including flaps, laser depilation, and wound care interventions as potential areas for randomised controlled trials.

CONCLUSIONS

This mapping review summarises eight decades of research on the management of pilonidal sinus. Further research is needed to identify front-running interventions, understand variation in practice and patient values, and to prioritise future research.

Limberg flap for the management of pilonidal sinus reduces disease recurrence compared to Karydakis and Bascom procedure: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

INTRODUCTION

The objective of this study is to compare the effectiveness of Limberg flap (LF) versus Karydakis and Bascom procedure to reduce the recurrence of pilonidal sinus disease.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

The data retrieved from the published randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing the effectiveness of LF versus Karydakis and Bascom procedure was analyzed using the principles of meta-analysis. The summated outcome of the dichotomous data was presented in risk ratio (RR).

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Eighteen RCTs on 2073 patients comparing the effectiveness of LF versus Karydakis and or Bascom procedure for the surgical excision of pilonidal sinus disease were analyzed. In the random effects model analysis using the statistical software Review Manager 5.3, the LF was associated with the reduced risk (RR, 0.52; 95% CI: 0.29, 0.93; z=2.19; P=0.03) of disease recurrence after pilonidal sinus excision compared to Karydakis and Bascom procedure. On subgroup analysis the LF was still superior to Karidakys procedure (RR, 0.52; 95% CI: 0.23, 1.17; z=1.57; P=0.12) and Bascom procedure (RR, 0.49; 95% CI: 0.19, 1.29; z=1.44; P=0.15) but statistically it was not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

LF seems to have clinical advantage over Karydakis and Bascom procedure in terms of reduced recurrence rate following surgical excision of pilonidal sinus. Although, this advantage was clinically persisted on subgroup analysis but failed to achieve statistical significance.

Outcomes of minimally invasive endoscopic pilonidal sinus surgery

INTRODUCTION

Pilonidal disease is a common condition that is often treated with morbid and painful surgeries. A minimally invasive, endoscopic approach has been described as an alternative to traditional open procedures. It allows the full visualization of the sinus tracks, leaves minimal scarring and results in less pain and a quicker recovery.

METHODS

Patients who underwent minimally invasive endoscopic surgery for pilonidal disease at a major metropolitan hospital in Australia were retrospectively identified. Their operative reports and medical records were assessed to determine analgesic requirements, lengths of hospital stay, recurrence rates of pilonidal disease, and wound complications.

RESULTS

Nine patients had endoscopic sinus surgery (six male, three female). All patients received treatment from the same surgeon. No patients required opiate analgesia for pain and only one stayed post-operatively in hospital overnight. There were no recorded wound complications. The median follow-up period was 28 months (range, 8-36 months). Eight patients had satisfactory healing recorded during their post-operative consultations. Three patients suffered recurrent disease.

CONCLUSION

Minimally invasive surgery is safe and well tolerated when employed to treat pilonidal disease. It could be considered as a first-line treatment for the obliteration of symptomatic pilonidal sinuses.

Comparison of postoperative quality of life of Limberg flap and Karydakis flap in pilonidal sinus operations

Objectives

Pilonidal sinus disease (PSD), most commonly seen in young men, is a chronic disease resulting from the pilosebaceous in the sacrococcygeal region. There is still no standardization in surgical treatment. In this study, the effectiveness, follow up outcomes and quality of life level were compared between Karydakis flap (KF) and Limberg flap (LF) operations.

Material and Methods

Among the patients who had undergone PSD surgery in our clinic between 2015 and 2016, those who could be reached and who received KF (n= 53) and LF (n= 51) operations were included into the study. Clinical data of these patients were retrospectively evaluated. Postoperative satisfaction levels of the patients were determined with Cardiff wound healing survey questions and visual analog scale.

Results

Mean operational time was 54 (44-75) minutes in the LF group and 45 (35-60) minutes in the KF group, and it was statistically significant (p= 0.001). Mean time to return to work was 14.3 (9-28) days in the LF group and 17.6 (10-30) days in the CF group and was statistically significant (p= 0.001). The rates of complications and recurrence were lower in the LF group although the difference was not statistically significant between the groups (p> 0.05). Mean psychosocial assessment score was 70.3 (57.5-88.7) in the KF group and 73.4 (53.5-87.5) in the LF group and the difference was statistically significant (p= 0.001).

Conclusion

LF was a more reliable and preferable method compared to KF because of earlier return-to-work, lower rate of recurrence at long term follow up, and higher psychosocial satisfaction.