Tension-free Primary Closure, Secondary Intention, and Limberg Flap, Which Is More Effective in Treatment of Uncomplicated Pilonidal Sinus Disease

Background: This study was performed to compare the efficacy and long-term outcomes of three surgical treatments for uncomplicated pilonidal sinus disease, tension-free primary closure, Limberg flap, and secondary intention (wide excision and packing).Methods: In this randomized clinical trial study, 66 patients with uncomplicated pilonidal sinus disease were randomly assigned to be surgically treated using tension-free primary closure, Limberg flap, or secondary intention methods. The outcomes including pain, healing time, recurrence, complications, disability, reoperation, and patient satisfaction were compared between three groups after two years of follow-up.Results: In Limberg flap group, the healing time and disability were significantly less than the two other groups; besides, the pain was significantly less than secondary intention group and more than the primary closure group (P < 0.0001 for all). There were no significant differences between the groups regarding recurrence, complications, reoperation, and patient satisfaction (P > 0.05 for all).Conclusions: Totally, according to our findings and comparison with other studies, it may be concluded that Limberg flap is relatively better than primary and secondary intention in patients with uncomplicated pilonidal sinus disease.© 2014 Tehran University of Medical Sciences. All rights reserved.Citation: Sabet B, Javaherzadeh M, Rajabian SS, Elyasian S, Shekarchizadeh A. Tension-free Primary Closure, Secondary Intention, and Limberg Flap, Which Is More Effective in Treatment of Uncomplicated Pilonidal Sinus Disease . Acad J Surg, 2016; 3(3-4): 46-9.

Tension-free Primary Closure, Secondary Intention, and Limberg Flap, Which Is More Effective in Treatment of Uncomplicated Pilonidal Sinus Disease Keywords:

Surgical flaps , Wound closure techniques , Pilonidal sinus , Postoperative complications