• Am. J. Surg. · Sep 2010

    Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study Comparative Study

    Multicenter prospective randomized trial comparing modified Limberg flap transposition and Karydakis flap reconstruction in patients with sacrococcygeal pilonidal disease.

    • Mehmet Fatih Can, Mert Mahsuni Sevinc, Oguz Hancerliogullari, Mehmet Yilmaz, and Gokhan Yagci.
    • Department of Surgery, Ardahan Army Community Hospital, Ardahan, Turkey. mfcan@gata.edu.tr
    • Am. J. Surg. 2010 Sep 1;200(3):318-27.

    BackgroundThere is still no consensus as to the optimal treatment for sacrococcygeal pilonidal disease (SPD). Many recommend off-midline closure, if any excisional procedure is to be selected.MethodsThe authors prospectively studied 145 patients with SPD who presented at 3 hospitals. Patients were randomly assigned to undergo either modified Limberg flap (MLF) transposition (n = 72) or Karydakis flap reconstruction (n = 73). Surgical findings, complications, recurrence rates, and degree of patient satisfaction, evaluated via a standardized telephone interview, were compared.ResultsOperation time was longer in the MLF group. There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of complication rate, length of stay, or recurrence rate. Patients in the Karydakis group reported feeling completely healed more quickly postoperatively. The two groups reported similar rates of satisfaction. Mandatory patient withdrawal from a given study arm because of the orifice straying from the midline occurred more frequently in the Karydakis group.ConclusionsThe MLF technique and the Karydakis procedure appear to generate comparable outcomes. With laterally situated orifices, however, the applicability of the Karydakis method may be limited.2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…