ReviewBMC surgery2025
Future of pilonidal cyst surgery: a comparative review of traditional and laser techniques.
Review in BMC surgery, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pilonidal disease is a common sacrococcygeal cyst or sinus that can significantly impact patients' quality of life, necessitating an analysis of evolving treatments to optimize patient outcomes. This review compares traditional and minimally invasive techniques focusing on laser ablation, in treating pilonidal cysts, focusing on each method's effectiveness, recovery time, recurrence rates, complications, cosmetics, and costs. We conducted a comprehensive assessment of literature exploring PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Embase for studies comparing traditional surgical techniques including traditional excision with open and closed healing, flap reconstructions, with minimally invasive procedures focusing on laser-assisted. Although traditional surgical techniques were practical, but they were associated with a relatively high risk of wound complications, recurrence, extended healing periods, and poor cosmetics. Laser techniques showed promising results in reducing hospital stays (for at most 3 h vs. days), postoperative pain, and recurrence rates, with healing rates up to 97%. However, laser methods may be less effective in severe or complicated cases, and they have higher costs. Laser-assisted techniques offer a less invasive option compared to traditional surgery, with greater patient fulfillment. However, additional research is needed to optimize laser procedures, especially in complex cases, and to establish long-term outcomes. For simpler pilonidal cysts, laser treatments are a promising option that could eventually replace traditional surgery as the standard of care.
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.