ArticleFrontiers in surgery2025
SiLaC® with EPSiT®: early outcomes of laser-endoscopic therapy for pilonidal sinus.
Article in Frontiers in surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of sinus laser associated closure (SiLaC) versus endoscopic pilonidal sinus treatment (EPSiT) in the management of pilonidal sinus disease.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Laser-assisted endoscopic treatment of pilonidal sinus disease in children: a first pediatric series.Pediatric surgery international · 2026Article
- Pediatric endoscopic pilonidal sinus treatment (PEPSiT) as standard of care results over 10 years' experience in 507 patients.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Long-term outcomes of endoscopic pilonidal sinus treatment: A single tertiary centre experience.Journal of minimal access surgery · 2026Article
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: Pilonidal sinus disease (PSD) commonly affects young adults and often requires repeated interventions with prolonged healing times. We evaluated a combined approach using Sinus Laser Ablation of the Cyst (SiLaC®) and Endoscopic Pilonidal Sinus Treatment (EPSiT®) to investigate postoperative pain, healing time, and recurrence. Methods: This retrospective, single-center study included 83 patients (aged 15-50) treated from January 2021 to December 2023 at Proctolaser Clinic, Tunisia. Under local, regional, or general anesthesia, patients underwent endoscopic debridement (EPSiT®) followed by diode laser ablation (SiLaC®) of sinus tracts. Data on operative time, Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) pain score, healing time to complete epithelialization, recurrence, and time to return to work were collected. All patients had at least 6 months of follow-up; a subset was followed up to 1 year. Results: The mean operative time was 25 ± 5.4 min. Mean VAS pain score at 24 h was 1.2 ± 0.6, and 92.3% of patients resumed work or normal activities within 24 h. Mean healing time was 17.3 days, with 95% achieving complete epithelialization by 3 weeks. The overall recurrence rate at 6 months was 3.6% (3/83). Two recurrences (3.3%) occurred in patients with primary PSD, and one recurrence (4.3%) occurred in a patient with recurrent PSD. Minor infections occurred in 1.2% (1/83) of patients and resolved with oral antibiotics. Aesthetic satisfaction was high; 88% rated outcomes "excellent." Conclusions: Combining SiLaC® with EPSiT® for pilonidal sinus disease appears safe and effective, featuring minimal pain, rapid return to daily activities, low recurrence, and excellent cosmetic results. A longer-term, multicenter approach is recommended to confirm durability and cost-effectiveness.
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.