Which flap method should be preferred for the treatment of pilonidal sinus? A prospective randomized study
- 675 Downloads
Although many methods, either surgical or non-surgical, are being used for the treatment of pilonidal sinus disease (PSD), there is still no consensus as to what constitutes the most appropriate method of treatment. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of the Limberg flap (LF), modified Limberg flap (MLF), and Karydakis flap (KF) procedures.
A prospective, randomized study was conducted on 295 patients scheduled for surgical treatment for PSD at the General Surgery Clinic of the Konya Training and Research Hospital in January 2009–May 2010. Patients with recurrent disease, an ASA score higher than III, obesity (BMI > 35 kg/m2), insulin-dependent diabetes, or a drug or alcohol addiction were excluded. The procedures performed were as follows: LF (n = 96), MLF (n = 108), and KF (n = 91).
The patients were followed up for a median of 33 months (range 24–41 months). There were more female patients in the LF group. The rate of seroma formation was higher in the KF group (19.8 %) compared to the LF and MLF groups (5.2 and 7.4 %, respectively; p = 0.027). The rate of wound dehiscence was higher in the KF group (15.4 %) compared to the LF and MLF groups (2.1 and 3.7 %, respectively; p < 0.001) as was the incidence of flap maceration (11 % in the KF vs. 1 % in the LF and 3.7 % in the MLF; p = 0.004). The incidence of PSD recurrence was also higher in the KF group (11 %) compared to the LF and MLF groups (6.3 and 1.9 % respectively; p = 0.027). In a multivariate analysis, the presence of seroma, hematoma, and wound infection were independent predictors of recurrence.
In our study, LF and MLF procedures were associated with a lower recurrence and complication rate compared to KF. However, more randomized studies comparing different reconstruction methods after PSD excision are needed.
KeywordsPilonidal sinus disease Limber flap Modified Limberg flap Karydakis flap
Conflict of interest
- 1.Lee PJ, Raniga S, Biyani DK, Watson AJ, Faragher IG, Frizelle FA (2008) Sacrococcygeal pilonidal disease. Colorectal Dis 10:639–650; discussion 651–652Google Scholar
- 12.Roshdy H, Ali Y, Askar W, Awad I, Farid M (2010) Rhomboid flap versus primary closure after excision of sacrococcigeal pilonidal sinus (a prospective randomized study). Egyp J Surg 29:146–152Google Scholar
- 30.Polat N, Albayrak D, İbiş AC, Altan A (2008) Comparison between Karydakis flap repair and primary closure for surgical treatment of sacrococcygeal pilonidal sinüs. Trakya Univ Tıp Fak Derg 25:87–94Google Scholar