ArticleAnnals of surgical treatment and research2025
The power of platelet-rich plasma on operated pilonidal disease: a prospective randomized controlled trial.
Article in Annals of surgical treatment and research, 2025. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Pilonidal sinus disease is a chronic inflammatory disease that affects approximately 1% of the population. Although many treatment methods have been described, there is no consensus on the exact treatment method. This study was conducted to evaluate the wound healing-promoting effect of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in patients treated using the unroofing and curettage technique. Methods: A total of 140 patients diagnosed with pilonidal sinus disease were included in the study. The patients were randomized into 2 groups; one group was followed up with a standard dressing after the operation, and the patients in the other group were treated with PRP in addition to the standard dressing. In this study, the wound healing rate between the 2 groups was determined as the primary objective. Results: In postoperative follow-up, a difference in wound healing rate was detected on postoperative day 10 (P = 0.007). While the average wound healing time of the patients in the control group was 41.1 ± 11.0 days (median, 40; range, 20-65), it was 23.6 ± 8.5 days (median, 25; range, 6-45) in the PRP group (P < 0.001). It was determined that the wound closure time of patients in the PRP group was faster. Conclusion: In our prospective randomized study, we found that PRP significantly increased the wound healing rate and patient comfort, with recurrence rates below 1% and minimal pain. We think that it should be the first-choice method before operations that cause extensive tissue loss, such as flap surgery.
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.