A comparison of two operations for pilonidal sinus disease

Pravin J. Gupta
{"title":"A comparison of two operations for pilonidal sinus disease","authors":"Pravin J. Gupta","doi":"10.4314/NJSR.V6I1-2.54789","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background : Postoperative wound complications have always been the main cause of concern followed by the risk of recurrence, in the surgical treatment of the pilonidal sinus disease. Various techniques evolved so far mainly aimed at solving these problems. This clinical study compares the results obtained through random allocation of patients between those subjected to, a) using the excision and marsupialisation technique and b) the technique of excision of the sinus tracts using a radiofrequency device. Methods : A total of 28 patients of chronic pilonidal sinus disease were randomised to undergo radiofrequency sinus excision technique (n=14) or excision and marsupialisation (n=14). The demographic data. Postoperative results complications and recurrence were documented for comparison of the results. Patients from both the groups were recalled after 12 months to assess recurrence. Results : Radiofrequency technique resulted to reducing the execution time (13 versus 34 minutes) as well as the hospital stay (9 versus 30 hrs). The postoperative pain (p=0.0044) and period off work (p=0.0019) was more with the marsupialisation technique. Two patients from marsupialisation developed wound infection. At subsequent follow-up, there was one case of recurrence in each group. Conclusion : in dealing with a limited, chronic pilonidal disease, the radiofrequency sinus excision technique has definite advantages over sinus excision and marsupialisation technique. It needed a shorter hospital stay with reduction on postoperative pain and early resumption to work.","PeriodicalId":19188,"journal":{"name":"Nigerian Journal of Surgical Research","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nigerian Journal of Surgical Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4314/NJSR.V6I1-2.54789","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Background : Postoperative wound complications have always been the main cause of concern followed by the risk of recurrence, in the surgical treatment of the pilonidal sinus disease. Various techniques evolved so far mainly aimed at solving these problems. This clinical study compares the results obtained through random allocation of patients between those subjected to, a) using the excision and marsupialisation technique and b) the technique of excision of the sinus tracts using a radiofrequency device. Methods : A total of 28 patients of chronic pilonidal sinus disease were randomised to undergo radiofrequency sinus excision technique (n=14) or excision and marsupialisation (n=14). The demographic data. Postoperative results complications and recurrence were documented for comparison of the results. Patients from both the groups were recalled after 12 months to assess recurrence. Results : Radiofrequency technique resulted to reducing the execution time (13 versus 34 minutes) as well as the hospital stay (9 versus 30 hrs). The postoperative pain (p=0.0044) and period off work (p=0.0019) was more with the marsupialisation technique. Two patients from marsupialisation developed wound infection. At subsequent follow-up, there was one case of recurrence in each group. Conclusion : in dealing with a limited, chronic pilonidal disease, the radiofrequency sinus excision technique has definite advantages over sinus excision and marsupialisation technique. It needed a shorter hospital stay with reduction on postoperative pain and early resumption to work.
两种手术治疗毛窦疾病的比较
背景:术后伤口并发症一直是手术治疗中引起关注的主要原因,其次是复发风险。迄今为止发展的各种技术主要是为了解决这些问题。本临床研究比较了随机分配患者的结果,a)使用切除和有袋化技术和b)使用射频设备切除鼻窦束技术。方法:28例慢性毛毛窦疾病患者随机分为两组,一组采用射频鼻窦切除技术(n=14),另一组采用切除加有袋化术(n=14)。人口统计数据。术后并发症及复发率进行比较。12个月后,两组患者均被召回评估复发情况。结果:射频技术减少了执行时间(13分钟比34分钟)和住院时间(9小时比30小时)。术后疼痛(p=0.0044)和休假(p=0.0019)明显高于有袋化技术。2例有袋化患者出现伤口感染。随访时,两组各有1例复发。结论:在治疗有限的慢性毛鞘疾病时,射频窦切除技术比窦切除和有袋化技术有明显的优势。它需要更短的住院时间,减少术后疼痛和早日恢复工作。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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