ArticleCureus2024
Surgeons' Experience and Practices in Managing the Pilonidal Sinus in the Kurdistan Region of Iraq.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Despite pilonidal sinus disease being a prevalent issue, there are still many challenges and controversies regarding its management. This study aimed to evaluate the experiences and practices of surgeons in the Kurdistan region of Iraq in the management of the pilonidal sinus and determine the most preferred treatment method, recurrence rates, and other complications related to different treatment methods. Methods This cross-sectional study was conducted on a convenience sample of 104 surgeons in the Kurdistan region of Iraq from January to February 2024 using an online survey based on Google Forms. A questionnaire was developed for data collection that included data on the experience and practice of pilonidal sinus treatment. Results The most common procedure followed by the study participants to manage the pilonidal sinus included primary open (n = 61/104, 58.7%), followed by primary closure (n = 20/104, 19.2%). The most common reasons or advantages for performing specific procedures to manage the pilonidal sinus were a lower recurrence rate (n = 73/104, 70.2%), safer procedures (n = 60/104, 57.7%), shorter operation times (n = 57/104, 54.8%), and shorter hospital stays (n = 53/104, 51.0%). The primary open method was the most commonly used method (n = 46/104, 44.3%), followed by simple incision and drainage (n = 25/104, 24.0%), primary closure (n = 23/104, 22.1%), and off-midline closure (n = 10/104, 9.6%). Most of the participants agreed that the primary open had the lowest recurrence rate (n = 68/104, 65.4%), while simple incision and drainage (n = 50/104, 48.1%) and primary closure (n = 29/104, 27.9%) were associated with frequent recurrence. Conclusions Standard treatment of pilonidal sinus disease is still not available. Most surgeons in the Kurdistan region of Iraq prefer the open method, which is the easiest, safest, and least recurrent yield method. However, it is the most painful and has the longest recovery time.
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.