ArticleTechniques in coloproctology2026
Does laser treatment affect outcome in pilonidal sinus disease? Long-term multicenter retrospective analysis of pit-picking alone vs. pit-picking with laser.
Article in Techniques in coloproctology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05569135 (Debridement and Laser Ablation Versus Debridement Alone in Pilonidal Disease), which is not on this 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.
Debridement and Laser Ablation Versus Debridement Alone in Pilonidal Disease: Retrospective Analysis of Mid-term Outcome
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
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe optimal management of pilonidal sinus disease (PSD) remains controversial, with multiple treatment approaches available. Pit-picking is a minimally invasive technique, often enhanced with laser treatment (LT), but the long-term benefits of LT remain uncertain. The objective of this study is to compare pit-picking alone versus pit-picking combined with LT.
methodsThis is a multicenter retrospective cohort study including seven centers across Turkey. Patients who underwent pit-picking surgery for PSD between June 2017 and March 2025 were included. Patients receiving adjunctive treatments beyond LT, undergoing excisional procedures, or with incomplete follow-up data were excluded. Pit-picking surgeries performed with or without LT were compared. The primary measure was the recurrence rate at 5 years. Secondary outcomes were postoperative pain, time to complete healing, complications, return to work, and costs.
resultsOf 306 patients, 109 (35.6%) underwent pit-picking alone, and 197 (64.4%) received pit-picking with LT. The complication rate was lower in the LT group (6.1% vs. 14.7%, p = 0.012). Patients treated with LT had shorter times to pain-free sitting (median 5 vs. 7 days, p < 0.001) and return to work (3 vs. 6 days, p < 0.001). Complete healing was achieved in 97.4% of patients, with a median time of 14 days. Recurrence rates at 5 years were similar (pit-picking: 13.8%, pit-picking + LT: 12.7%, p = 0.460). Costs were higher for the LT group ($1212 ± 146 vs. $888 ± 148), although complicated pit-picking cases had comparable costs to the LT group ($1198 ± 370, p = 0.004). Risk factors for recurrence included high BMI, family history, advanced Tezel stage, and postoperative complications.
conclusionsWhile LT improves early postoperative outcomes, it does not impact long-term recurrence rates. The increased cost of LT should be weighed against its benefits in reducing complications, pain, and recovery time. Further randomized trials are needed to refine patient selection criteria and assess cost-effectiveness. CLINICAL
trial registrationNCT05569135, Registration date: 05.10.2022.
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.