ArticlePediatric surgery international2024
Standardized pilonidal protocol as rescue therapy for excision-refractory pilonidal disease.
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.
- Light-based Epilation as an Adjunct to Surgery in the Management of Pilonidal Disease: A Meta-analysis.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2026Article
- Future of pilonidal cyst surgery: a comparative review of traditional and laser techniques.BMC surgery · 2025Review
- Adolescent Gluteal Cleft Pathologies Not Due to Pilonidal Disease: A Case Series and Diagnostic Algorithm.Clinical medicine insights. Pediatrics · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeSevere pilonidal diseases have refractory symptoms despite multiple surgeries and optimal therapy remains unclear. We hypothesized that standardized minimally invasive protocol could be an effective rescue treatment.
methodsWe prospectively collected data from symptomatic patients who underwent ≥ 1 pilonidal excision prior to presentation at our clinic 2019-2023. We treated these patients with standardized protocol incorporating local wound care, regular manual/laser epilation, and selective debridement/pit trephination.
resultsWe treated 34 refractory patients (23 males) with median follow-up 405 days. Median age of first symptoms was 17.1 years; presentation to our clinic 20.0 years. Prior to our clinic, 27 received one surgery (cleft lift-2, excision no closure-1, excision primary closure-18, wound vac after excision-3, excision flap closure-3); 7 had two surgeries (excision without closure + cleft lift-1, primary closure after excision twice-3, flap closure after excision twice-2, excision primary closure + excision without closure-1). We treated all patients with regular epilation ± local wound care. 14 (41%) underwent trephination ± debridement. All patients achieved complete resolution after median 52 days. Five (14.7%) recurred and were treated with trephination + debridement-2 or wound care alone-3. Symptom length had no correlation with resolution time, skin type, hair amount.
conclusionsStandardized minimally invasive protocol requiring only selective surgical intervention can treat refractory pilonidal disease with low recurrence rate.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39141128What 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.