Comparison of Limberg Flap and Karydakis Flap Surgery for the Treatment of Patients With Pilonidal Sinus Disease: A Single-Blinded Parallel Randomized Study

Mina Alvandipour, Mohammad Sadegh Zamani, Mojtaba Ghorbani, Jamshid Yazdani Charati, Mohammad Yasin Karami, Mina Alvandipour, Mohammad Sadegh Zamani, Mojtaba Ghorbani, Jamshid Yazdani Charati, Mohammad Yasin Karami

Abstract

Purpose: Pilonidal sinus disease is a common condition, which mostly affects young men. While various surgical techniques have been introduced for treating intergluteal pilonidal disease (IPD), controversies still exist regarding the best surgical approach. The purpose of this study was to compare the efficiency and the short-term outcomes of Limberg flap and Karydakis flap surgeries for the treatments of patients with IPD.

Methods: A total of 80 patients with IPD who had underwent either Karydakis flap (KF group: n = 37) or Limberg flap (LF group: n = 27) surgery between January 2015 and January 2016 at Imam Khomeini Hospital of Sari in the North of Iran were recruited for inclusion in this randomized, single-blind study.

Results: Compared to the KF group, the LF group showed faster complete wound healing, longer duration of surgery and hospital stay, larger wound size, and shorter period of incapacity for work. The overall patient satisfaction in the LF group was significantly higher than that in the KF group. The visual analogue scale score of pain was lower in the LF group than in the KF group. Also, the overall frequency of postoperative complications was higher in the KF group than in the LF group. Recurrence was reported in one patient from the KF group.

Conclusion: Given the lower rate of postoperative complications and greater cosmetic satisfaction of patients, the Limberg flap procedure should be selected, instead of the Karydakis flap procedure, as the standard technique for treating patients with IPD.

Keywords: Pilonidal sinus disease; Postoperative complication; Recurrence; Surgical flaps.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Fig. 1.
Fig. 1.
The CONSORT (consolidated standards for reporting of trials) diagram showing the allocation process throughout the trial.

References

    1. Khanna A, Rombeau JL. Pilonidal disease. Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2011;24:46–53.
    1. Akinci OF, Bozer M, Uzunköy A, Düzgün SA, Coşkun A. Incidence and aetiological factors in pilonidal sinus among Turkish soldiers. Eur J Surg. 1999;165:339–42.
    1. Jones DJ. ABC of colorectal diseases. Pilonidal sinus. BMJ. 1992;305:410–2.
    1. Hull TL, Wu J. Pilonidal disease. Surg Clin North Am. 2002;82:1169–85.
    1. Søndenaa K, Andersen E, Nesvik I, Søreide JA. Patient characteristics and symptoms in chronic pilonidal sinus disease. Int J Colorectal Dis. 1995;10:39–42.
    1. da Silva JH. Pilonidal cyst: cause and treatment. Dis Colon Rectum. 2000;43:1146–56.
    1. Kitchen P. Pilonidal sinus - management in the primary care setting. Aust Fam Physician. 2010;39:372–5.
    1. Davage ON. The origin of sacrococcygeal pilonidal sinuses based on an analysis of four hundred sixty-three cases. Am J Pathol. 1954;30:1191–205.
    1. Humphries AE, Duncan JE. Evaluation and management of pilonidal disease. Surg Clin North Am. 2010;90:113–24.
    1. Oncel M, Kurt N, Kement M, Colak E, Eser M, Uzun H. Excision and marsupialization versus sinus excision for the treatment of limited chronic pilonidal disease: a prospective, randomized trial. Tech Coloproctol. 2002;6:165–9.
    1. Bascom J. Pilonidal disease: long-term results of follicle removal. Dis Colon Rectum. 1983;26:800–7.
    1. Al-Khamis A, McCallum I, King PM, Bruce J. Healing by primary versus secondary intention after surgical treatment for pilonidal sinus. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;(1):CD006213.
    1. Petersen S, Koch R, Stelzner S, Wendlandt TP, Ludwig K. Primary closure techniques in chronic pilonidal sinus: a survey of the results of different surgical approaches. Dis Colon Rectum. 2002;45:1458–67.
    1. Nursal TZ, Ezer A, Calişkan K, Törer N, Belli S, Moray G. Prospective randomized controlled trial comparing V-Y advancement flap with primary suture methods in pilonidal disease. Am J Surg. 2010;199:170–7.
    1. Faux W, Pillai SC, Gold DM. Limberg flap for pilonidal disease: the “no-protractor” approach, 3 steps to success. Tech Coloproctol. 2005;9:153–5.
    1. Bascom J, Bascom T. Failed pilonidal surgery: new paradigm and new operation leading to cures. Arch Surg. 2002;137:1146–50.
    1. Bascom J, Bascom T. Utility of the cleft lift procedure in refractory pilonidal disease. Am J Surg. 2007;193:606–9.
    1. Tezel E. Cleft lift procedure with excision of pits for extensive sacrococcygeal pilonidal disease. Colorectal Dis. 2006;8:72.
    1. Bessa SS. Results of the lateral advancing flap operation (modified Karydakis procedure) for the management of pilonidal sinus disease. Dis Colon Rectum. 2007;50:1935–40.
    1. Bessa SS. Comparison of short-term results between the modified Karydakis flap and the modified Limberg flap in the management of pilonidal sinus disease: a randomized controlled study. Dis Colon Rectum. 2013;56:491–8.
    1. Mentes BB, Leventoglu S, Cihan A, Tatlicioglu E, Akin M, Oguz M. Modified Limberg transposition flap for sacrococcygeal pilonidal sinus. Surg Today. 2004;34:419–23.
    1. Karydakis GE. Easy and successful treatment of pilonidal sinus after explanation of its causative process. Aust N Z J Surg. 1992;62:385–9.
    1. Bali İ, Aziret M, Sözen S, Emir S, Erdem H, Çetinkünar S, et al. Effectiveness of Limberg and Karydakis flap in recurrent pilonidal sinus disease. Clinics (Sao Paulo) 2015;70:350–5.
    1. Clothier PR, Haywood IR. The natural history of the post anal (pilonidal) sinus. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 1984;66:201–3.
    1. Bchary S. A comparison of prognosis in patients with pilonidal sinus surgery admitted to Shohada hospital of Khorramabad during 2005-2012. Yafteh. 2013;15:30–6.
    1. Søndenaa K, Pollard ML. Histology of chronic pilonidal sinus. APMIS. 1995;103:267–72.
    1. Hosseini SV, Rezazadehkermani M, Roshanravan R, Gabash KM, Aghaie-Afshar M. Pilonidal disease: review of recent literature. Ann Colorectal Res. 2014;2:e19705. doi: 10.17795/acr19705.
    1. Gurer A, Gomceli I, Ozdogan M, Ozlem N, Sozen S, Aydin R. Is routine cavity drainage necessary in Karydakis flap operation? A prospective, randomized trial. Dis Colon Rectum. 2005;48:1797–9.
    1. Karaca T, Yoldaş O, Bilgin BÇ, Ozer S, Yoldaş S, Karaca NG. Comparison of short-term results of modified Karydakis flap and modified Limberg flap for pilonidal sinus surgery. Int J Surg. 2012;10:601–6.
    1. Ates M, Dirican A, Sarac M, Aslan A, Colak C. Short and longterm results of the Karydakis flap versus the Limberg flap for treating pilonidal sinus disease: a prospective randomized study. Am J Surg. 2011;202:568–73.
    1. Can MF, Sevinc MM, Hancerliogullari O, Yilmaz M, Yagci G. Multicenter prospective randomized trial comparing modified Limberg flap transposition and Karydakis flap reconstruction in patients with sacrococcygeal pilonidal disease. Am J Surg. 2010;200:318–27.
    1. Arslan K, Said Kokcam S, Koksal H, Turan E, Atay A, Dogru O. Which flap method should be preferred for the treatment of pilonidal sinus? A prospective randomized study. Tech Coloproctol. 2014;18:29–37.

Source: PubMed

Patrocinadores e Colaboradores

Condições médicas

Intervenções de drogas

3
Se inscrever