Banu Karapolat1 , Sercan Büyükakıncak2 , Eray Kurnaz1 , Üzer Küçüktülü1

Abstract

Objectives: Although many surgical techniques have been described for treatment of pilonidal sinus disease (PSD), the ideal treatment method remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to compare Limberg flap and oval flap techniques in patients with PSD.
Material and Methods: Patients diagnosed with PSD who underwent surgery using either the Limberg flap or oval flap technique between January 2012 and January 2016 at the general surgery outpatient clinic were retrospectively reviewed from the database of our hospital; 142 patients (124 males and 18 females) were invited for examination. The demographic characteristics of the patients such as age and gender, hospital stays, seroma occurrence, surgical site infections, wound dehiscence, flap necrosis, loss of sensation, and recurrences were evaluated based on the information obtained from the database and from physical examinations as well as questioning of the patients. The results were statistically compared, and a p value of <0.05 was considered significant.
Results: The mean age of the patients was 27.5±7.8 years in the Limberg flap group and 26.5±7.2 years in the oval flap group. No significant difference was found between the two groups regarding patients’ mean age; gender distribution; postoperative hospital stay; recurrence; and complications, such as seroma, infection, wound dehiscence, and loss of sensation. Flap necrosis was not observed in any of the patients.
Conclusion: The Limberg flap and oval flap procedures both involve minimum morbidity and short hospital stay because they were not superior to one another regarding treatment effectiveness, complications, and recurrence in the pilonidal sinus surgery.

Keywords: Pilonidal sinus, surgical flaps, postoperative complications, recurrence

Cite this paper as: Karapolat B, Büyükakıncak S, Kurnaz E, Küçüktülü Ü. Comparison of limberg flap and oval flap techniques in sacrococcygeal pilonidal sinus disease surgery. Turk J Surg 2018; 34(4): 311-314.


 

Ethics Committee Approval

Authors declared that the research was conducted according to the principles of the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki “Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects” (amended in October 2013).

Peer Review

Externally peer-reviewed.

Author Contributions

Concept - B.K., S.B., U.K.; Design - B.K., E.K., U.K.; Supervision - B.K., S.B., E.K., U.K.; Resource - B.K., S.B., E.K.; Materials - B.K., S.B., E.K., U.K.; Data Collection and/or Processing - B.K., E.K.; Analysis and/or Interpretation - B.K., S.B., E.K., U.K.; Literature Search - B.K., S.B., E.K.; Writing Manuscript - B.K., S.B., U.K.; Critical Reviews - B.K., S.B., U.K.

Conflict of Interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Financial Disclosure

The authors declared that this study has received no financial support.