Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30531689›Full record

ArticleMedical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research2018

Comparison of Primary Midline Closure, Limberg Flap, and Karydakis Flap Techniques in Pilonidal Sinus Surgery.

Murathan Erkent, İbrahim Tayfun Şahiner, Mesut Bala, Murat Kendirci, Murat Baki Yıldırım, Ramazan Topçu, Settar Bostanoğlu, Mete Dolapcı

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05851690 (Bilaterally Parallel Elliptic Flap Versus Karydakis Flap in Pilonidal Sinus Disease), which is not on this map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT05851690 nacompletednot on this map

Bilaterally Parallel Elliptic Flap Versus Karydakis Flap in Pilonidal Sinus Disease: A Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorAtlas UniversityRan2016 to 2020Enrolled102ConditionsPilonidal SinusArmsSurgical treatment of pilonidal sinus disease
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Comparative Outcomes of Surgical Techniques for Pilonidal Sinus: A Turkish Retrospective Study.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Murathan ErkentDepartment of General Surgery, Hitit University School of Medicine, Çorum, Turkey.
İbrahim Tayfun ŞahinerDepartment of General Surgery, Hitit University School of Medicine, Çorum, Turkey.
Mesut BalaDepartment of General Surgery, Hitit University School of Medicine, Çorum, Turkey.
Murat KendirciDepartment of General Surgery, Hitit University School of Medicine, Çorum, Turkey.
Murat Baki YıldırımDepartment of General Surgery, Hitit University School of Medicine, Çorum, Turkey.
Ramazan TopçuDepartment of General Surgery, Hitit University School of Medicine, Çorum, Turkey.
Settar BostanoğluDepartment of General Surgery, Hitit University School of Medicine, Çorum, Turkey.
Mete DolapcıDepartment of General Surgery, Hitit University School of Medicine, Çorum, Turkey.
Hitit Üniversitesi · TR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND Pilonidal sinus (PS) is a common disease of the sacrococcygeal-natal region. There are many treatment options, but there is still no consensus on the ideal treatment. We compared the results of our PS patients who were treated with primary midline closure (PMC), Limberg flap repair (LFR), and Karydakis flap (KF). MATERIAL AND METHODS The data for 924 PS patients from 2013 to 2017 were retrospectively examined. Demographic data, surgical procedures, schedules, and recurrence rates were examined. RESULTS The mean age was 28.4 years (14-77 years), 82.5% were male (n=762), and 17.5% were female (n=162). PMC was performed on 53.7% (n=496) of the patients, 32.5% (n=300) received LFR, and 13.9% (n=128) underwent KF. PMC was the first choice among females but LFR was the first choice in recurrent patients. The recurrence rate was 10.8% in the PMC group, 8% in the LFR group, and 3.1% in the KF group. In Short Form Survey-36 (SF-36) scores, the best cosmetic outcomes were observed in cases of PMC (p<0.05). Overall, wound dehiscence (WD) was observed in 7.5%, surgical site infection (SSI) in 2.4%, and seroma in 8.5% of all patients. The KF group had the lowest complication rates (p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS According to the results of this study, the reason for preferring PMC among women is cosmetic concerns. PMC still remains important for treatment, but it should be noted that the recurrence rates due to inadequate excision are mostly observed in cases of PMC. Considering their low recurrence rates, LFR or KF should be considered first. When low recurrence rates, patient comfort, and cosmetic results are evaluated together, KF in particular emerges as a method preferred by physicians and patients.

Indexed as

AdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalOrthopedic ProceduresPatient SatisfactionPilonidal SinusRecurrenceRetrospective StudiesSacrococcygeal RegionSurgical FlapsSurgical Wound InfectionWound Healing

Identifiers

PMID30531689
PMCPMC6299795
OpenAlexW2904526163

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.