Advances in Coccygectomy: A Comprehensive Review Evaluating Surgical Techniques for Coccygodynia.

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q3 NEUROSCIENCES
Barnabas Obeng-Gyasi, Ethan D L Brown, Anoop Sai Chinthala, Gordon Mao
{"title":"Advances in Coccygectomy: A Comprehensive Review Evaluating Surgical Techniques for Coccygodynia.","authors":"Barnabas Obeng-Gyasi, Ethan D L Brown, Anoop Sai Chinthala, Gordon Mao","doi":"10.3390/brainsci15020213","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Coccygodynia presents significant challenges in diagnosis and treatment. While coccygectomy has emerged as a crucial intervention for refractory cases, significant heterogeneity exists in surgical techniques. Traditional approaches are increasingly complemented by novel methods, necessitating a comprehensive review of current surgical options.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A comprehensive literature review was conducted using Ovid MEDLINE, Cochrane Library and Embase databases from inception to present. Search terms included \"coccygectomy\", \"coccydynia\", \"coccygodynia\", \"coccyx pain\" and \"tailbone pain\". We analyzed peer-reviewed studies focusing on surgical techniques, outcomes and complications of coccygectomy. Studies were excluded if non-peer-reviewed, non-English without translation, or not directly addressing surgical management.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Traditional midline approaches, while common, demonstrate increased wound complications compared to paramedian techniques. Minimally invasive methods, including coccygeoplasty and endoscopic coccygectomy, show promising early outcomes with reduced recovery times. Both partial and complete resections provide significant pain relief, with complete resection potentially offering superior results in severe cases. Wound closure technique significantly impacts surgical success.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Optimal outcomes in coccygectomy require individualized surgical approaches incorporating modern techniques like paramedian incision and advanced wound closure. Emerging minimally invasive procedures may further reduce complications and enhance recovery. Treatment success depends on careful patient selection and surgical technique optimization.</p>","PeriodicalId":9095,"journal":{"name":"Brain Sciences","volume":"15 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11853250/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Brain Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci15020213","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Coccygodynia presents significant challenges in diagnosis and treatment. While coccygectomy has emerged as a crucial intervention for refractory cases, significant heterogeneity exists in surgical techniques. Traditional approaches are increasingly complemented by novel methods, necessitating a comprehensive review of current surgical options.

Methods: A comprehensive literature review was conducted using Ovid MEDLINE, Cochrane Library and Embase databases from inception to present. Search terms included "coccygectomy", "coccydynia", "coccygodynia", "coccyx pain" and "tailbone pain". We analyzed peer-reviewed studies focusing on surgical techniques, outcomes and complications of coccygectomy. Studies were excluded if non-peer-reviewed, non-English without translation, or not directly addressing surgical management.

Results: Traditional midline approaches, while common, demonstrate increased wound complications compared to paramedian techniques. Minimally invasive methods, including coccygeoplasty and endoscopic coccygectomy, show promising early outcomes with reduced recovery times. Both partial and complete resections provide significant pain relief, with complete resection potentially offering superior results in severe cases. Wound closure technique significantly impacts surgical success.

Conclusions: Optimal outcomes in coccygectomy require individualized surgical approaches incorporating modern techniques like paramedian incision and advanced wound closure. Emerging minimally invasive procedures may further reduce complications and enhance recovery. Treatment success depends on careful patient selection and surgical technique optimization.

背景:尾骨神经痛给诊断和治疗带来了巨大挑战。虽然尾骨切除术已成为治疗难治性病例的重要干预措施,但手术技术存在很大差异。传统方法越来越多地得到新方法的补充,因此有必要对当前的手术方案进行全面回顾:方法:使用 Ovid MEDLINE、Cochrane Library 和 Embase 数据库对从开始到现在的文献进行了全面回顾。检索词包括 "尾骨切除术"、"尾骨痛"、"尾骨神经痛"、"尾骨痛 "和 "尾骨痛"。我们分析了关于尾骨切除术的手术技术、效果和并发症的同行评议研究。非同行评议、非英语、无翻译或不直接涉及手术治疗的研究均被排除在外:结果:传统的中线方法虽然常见,但与侧线技术相比,伤口并发症有所增加。包括尾骨成形术和内窥镜尾骨切除术在内的微创方法显示出良好的早期疗效并缩短了恢复时间。部分切除和完全切除都能明显缓解疼痛,完全切除可能会为严重病例带来更好的治疗效果。伤口闭合技术对手术成功与否有很大影响:结论:尾骨切除术的最佳效果需要结合现代技术的个性化手术方法,如侧切口和先进的伤口闭合技术。新出现的微创手术可进一步减少并发症,促进康复。治疗成功与否取决于患者的谨慎选择和手术技术的优化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Brain Sciences
Brain Sciences Neuroscience-General Neuroscience
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
9.10%
发文量
1472
审稿时长
18.71 days
期刊介绍: Brain Sciences (ISSN 2076-3425) is a peer-reviewed scientific journal that publishes original articles, critical reviews, research notes and short communications in the areas of cognitive neuroscience, developmental neuroscience, molecular and cellular neuroscience, neural engineering, neuroimaging, neurolinguistics, neuropathy, systems neuroscience, and theoretical and computational neuroscience. Our aim is to encourage scientists to publish their experimental and theoretical results in as much detail as possible. There is no restriction on the length of the papers. The full experimental details must be provided so that the results can be reproduced. Electronic files or software regarding the full details of the calculation and experimental procedure, if unable to be published in a normal way, can be deposited as supplementary material.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信