Efficacy of modified Limberg flap in surgical treatment of infected pilonidal abscess: a case–control study
Summary
Objectives
Despite several surgical techniques in the treatment of pilonidal sinus, the ideal management is still under debate. Recently, Limberg flap has revealed promises owing to a lower recurrence rate. Our study aimed to assess mid-term outcomes of Limberg flap in patients with pilonidal abscesses.
Methods
Through a prospective case–control study, we enrolled 90 consecutive patients with pilonidal disease attending department of surgery in one of the university hospitals in Tehran, Iran, between January 2010 and April 2011. Patients with simple sinus (control group) underwent wide excision of the sinus, while those with infected pilonidal abscess received incision and drainage of the abscess and then excision (case group), and ultimately all the patients were treated with Limberg flap. Patients were followed by regular outpatient visits at 1 week, 2 weeks, 1 month, 6 months, and 1 year.
Results
Of 90 patients, 17 were in the case group (18.88 %) and 73 in the control group (81.12 %). All patients were treated with Limberg flap and then followed at regular outpatient visits for a median of 11 months. With regard to the early complications, hematoma occurred in one patient (1.4 %) and infection in three patients (4.1 %) of the control group, while late complications occurred only in two patients of the control group as paresthesia, which did not differ significantly.
Conclusions
This study showed that Limberg flap is effective in the surgical treatment of infected pilonidal abscess, with desirable mid-term outcomes.
Keywords
Limberg flap Pilonidal abscess Long-term outcome Recurrence rate Wound infectionNotes
Conflict of Interest
The authors report no conflicts of interest.
References
- 1.Søndenaa K, Andersen E, Nesvik I, Søreide J. Patient characteristics and symptoms in chronic pilonidal sinus disease. Int J Colorectal Dis. 1995;10:39–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 2.Harlak A, Mentes O, Kilic S, et al. Sacrococcygeal pilonidal disease: analysis of previously proposed risk factors. Clinics (Sao Paulo). 2010;65:125–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 3.Akinci O, Bozer M, Uzunköy A, Duüzgün S, Cokun A. Incidence and aetiological factors in pilonidal sinus among Turkish soldiers. Eur J Surg. 1999;165(4):339–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 4.Chintapatla S, Safarani N, Kumar S, Haboubi N. Sacrococcygeal pilonidal sinus: historical review, pathological insight and surgical options. Tech Coloproctol. 2003;7:3–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 5.Da Silva J. Pilonidal cyst: cause and treatment. Dis Colon Rectum. 2000;43(8):1146–56.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.Shabbir J, Chaudhary BN, Britton DC. Management of sacrococcygeal pilonidal sinus disease: a snapshot of current practice. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2011;26:1619–20.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 7.Schoeller T, Wechselberger G, Otto A, Papp C. Definite surgical treatment of complicated recurrent pilonidal disease with a modified fasciocutaneous V-Y advancement flap. Surgery. 1997;121:258–63.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8.Kaya B, Eris C, Atalay S, Bat O, Bulut NE, Mantoglu B, et al. Modified Limberg transposition flap in the treatment of pilonidal sinus disease. Tech Coloproctol. 2012;16:55–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 9.al-Hassan HK, Francis IM, Neglen P. Primary closure or secondary granulation after excision of pilonidal sinus? Acta Chir Scand. 1990;156(10):695–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 10.Eryilmaz R, Sahin M, Alimoglu O, Dasiran F. Surgical treatment of sacrococcygeal pilonidal sinus with the Limberg transposition flap. Surgery. 2003;134:745–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.Azab A, Kamal M, Saad R, Abou A, Atta K, Ali NA. Radical cure of pilonidal sinus by a transposition rhomboid flap. Br J Surg. 1984;71:154–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.Akin M, Leventoglu S, Mentes B, et al. Comparison of the classic Limberg flap and modified Limberg flap in the treatment of pilonidal sinus disease: a retrospective analysis of 416 patients. Surg Today. 2010;40:757–62.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 13.Webb PM, Wysocki AP. Does pilonidal abscess heal quicker with off-midline incision and drainage? Tech Coloproctol. 2011;15:179–83.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.Hosseini S, Bananzadeh A, Rivaz M, Sabet B, Mosallae M, Pourahmad S, et al. The comparison between drainage, delayed excision and primary closure with excision and secondary healing in management of pilonidal abscess. Int J Surg. 2006;4(4):228–31.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 15.Vahedian J, Nabavizadeh F, Nakhaee N, Vahedian M, Sadeghpour A. Comparison between drainage and curettage in the treatment of acute pilonidal abscess. Saudi Med J. 2005;26(4):553–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 16.Licheri S, Pisano G, Erdas E, Farci S, Pomata M, Daniele G. Radical treatment of acute pilonidal abscess by marsupialization. G Chir. 2004;25(11–12):414–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 17.Ommer A, Pitt C, Albrecht K, Marla B, Peitgen K, Walz M. Pilonidal sinus—primary closure also in case of abscess? Zentralbl Chir. 2004;129(3):216–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 18.Muller K, Marti L, Tarantino I, Jayne DG, Wolff K, Hetzer FH. Prospective analysis of cosmesis, morbidity, and patient satisfaction following Limberg flap for the treatment of sacrococcygeal pilonidal sinus. Dis Colon Rectum. 2011;54(4):487–94.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 19.Schrogendorfer KF, Haslik W, Aszmann OC, Vierhapper M, Frey M, Lumenta DB. Prospective evaluation of a single-sided innervated gluteal artery perforator flap for reconstruction for extensive and recurrent pilonidal sinus disease: functional, aesthetic, and patient-reported long-term outcomes. World J Surg. 2012;36(9):2230–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar