ArticlePediatric surgery international2024
Outcomes of pediatric pilonidal disease treatment: excision with off-midline flap reconstruction versus endoscopic pilonidal sinus treatment.
Article in Pediatric surgery international, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Endoscopic treatment versus open excision for pediatric pilonidal disease: technical description of a modified (P)EPSiT approach using standard equipment and retrospective cohort study.Techniques in coloproctology · 2026Article
- Pediatric Pilonidal Disease Surgical Approach (PPiDSA) Study.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- The application of EPSiT in pilonidal sinus disease: an international Delphi consensus study endorsed by the Association of Laparoscopic Surgeons of Great Britain and Ireland (ALSGBI).Techniques in coloproctology · 2025Review
- Practice patterns of paediatric surgeons on treating pilonidal sinus disease - a national survey study.International journal of colorectal disease · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposePilonidal disease (PD) is marked by chronic inflammation and frequent recurrence which can decrease quality of life. However, debate remains regarding the optimal treatment for PD in the pediatric population. This study compares two recommended treatment approaches-excision with off-midline flap reconstruction (OMF: Bascom cleft lift flap, modified Limberg flap) and minimally invasive endoscopic pilonidal sinus treatment (EPSiT).
methodsSingle-center retrospective evaluation of patients 1-21 years of age with PD who underwent either excision with OMF reconstruction or EPSiT between 10/1/2011 and 10/31/2021. Outcomes included were disease recurrence, reoperation, and wound complication rates. Comparisons were performed using Chi-square and Mann-Whitney U tests.
results18 patients underwent excision/OMF reconstruction and 45 patients underwent EPSiT. The excision/OMF reconstruction cohort was predominantly male (44.4% vs 17.8% p = 0.028), with history of prior pilonidal infection (33.3% vs 6.7%; p = 0.006), and longer median operative time (60 min vs 17 min; p < 0.001). The excision/OMF reconstruction cohort had a higher rate of wound complications (22.2% vs 0%; p = 0.001), but lower rates of disease recurrence (5.6% vs 33.3%; p = 0.022) and reoperation (5.6% vs 31.1%; p = 0.031).
conclusionIn pediatric patients with PD, excision with OMF reconstruction may decrease recurrence and reoperation rates with increased operative times and wound complication rates, compared to EPSiT.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.