ArticleHeliyon2024
Surgical treatment of pilonidal disease - Short-term follow up results of minimally invasive pit-picking surgery versus radical excision without suturing: A prospective randomised trial.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Outcomes of Pilonidal Surgery Performed in the Setting of Standard Adjunct Laser Hair Removal: A Retrospective Cohort Study.International wound journal · 2026Article
- A Comparative Analysis of Pain Assessment Methods in the Initial Postoperative Phase Following Different Pilonidal Cyst Surgeries.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In this study we compared the potential benefits of surgical treatments for chronic symptomatic pilonidal disease (PD) - minimally invasive pit-picking surgery and radical excision without wound suturing. Materials and methods: A total of 100 adult patients with chronic symptomatic PD were enrolled in this study at the Kaunas Hospital of the Lithuanian University of Health Sciences. They were randomly divided into two groups: pit-picking surgery (n = 50) and radical excision with open healing (n = 50). Recurrent PD patients were not excluded. The comparison of the techniques was based on pain within the first postoperative week, failed surgery rates, and wound healing time. Additionally, pain levels at different time intervals following the treatment, analgesic consumption, and time off work, were assessed and compared. Results: A total of 89 patients (89 %) were available for follow-up after 6 months. Pain levels the first postoperative week were significantly lower in the pit-picking group compared to the radical excision group, with median scores of 10.0 and 20.0, respectively (p = 0.002). The complete wound healing time was longer in the radical excision group (60 days) versus the pit-picking group (17 days), with a significant difference noted (p = 0.00). No significant difference was observed between the type of surgery and the rate of failed surgery, with 5 (11.9 %) cases in the pit-picking group and 4 (8.5 %) in the radical excision group. Conclusion: Based on our short-term findings, minimally invasive pit-picking surgery is a better option regarding pain, wound healing time and failed surgery rate. In cases where this approach is not suitable, other alternatives should be contemplated, as radical surgery without wound suturing should not be employed as a treatment method for PD. Additionally, the relationship between PD and recurrence rates should be investigated further.
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.