Endoscopic pilonidal sinus treatment (EPSiT) in recurrent pilonidal disease: a prospective international multicenter study.
Endoscopic treatment
Minimally invasive treatment
Pilonidal disease
Recurrent pilonidal sinus
VAAFT
Journal
International journal of colorectal disease
ISSN: 1432-1262
Titre abrégé: Int J Colorectal Dis
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 8607899
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Apr 2019
Apr 2019
Historique:
accepted:
23
01
2019
pubmed:
6
2
2019
medline:
8
8
2019
entrez:
6
2
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Pilonidal disease (PD) is a common disease of the natal cleft, which can lead to complications including infection and abscess formation. Various operative management options are available, but the ideal technique is still debatable. Recurrent PD after surgical treatment is frequent event for the 25-30% of cases. The present study evaluated endoscopic pilonidal sinus treatment (EPSiT) in recurrent and multi-recurrent PD. Of the consecutive prospective patients with recurrent PD, 122 were enrolled in a prospective international multicenter study conducted at a secondary and tertiary colorectal surgery centers. Primary endpoint was to evaluate short- and long-term outcomes: healing rate/time, morbidity rate, re-recurrence rate, and patient's quality of life (QoL). Complete wound healing rate was occurred in 95% of the patient, with a mean complete wound healing time of 29 ± 12 days. The incomplete healing rate (5%) was significantly related to the number of external openings (p = 0.008), and recurrence was reported in six cases (5.1%). Normal daily activity was established on the first postoperative day, and the mean duration before patients returned to work was 3 days. QoL significantly increased between the preoperative stage and 30 days after the EPSiT procedure (45.3 vs. 7.9; p < 0.0001). The EPSiT procedure seems to be a safe and effective technique in treating even complex recurrent PD. It enables excellent short- and long-term outcomes than various other techniques that are more invasive.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Pilonidal disease (PD) is a common disease of the natal cleft, which can lead to complications including infection and abscess formation. Various operative management options are available, but the ideal technique is still debatable. Recurrent PD after surgical treatment is frequent event for the 25-30% of cases. The present study evaluated endoscopic pilonidal sinus treatment (EPSiT) in recurrent and multi-recurrent PD.
METHODS
METHODS
Of the consecutive prospective patients with recurrent PD, 122 were enrolled in a prospective international multicenter study conducted at a secondary and tertiary colorectal surgery centers. Primary endpoint was to evaluate short- and long-term outcomes: healing rate/time, morbidity rate, re-recurrence rate, and patient's quality of life (QoL).
RESULTS
RESULTS
Complete wound healing rate was occurred in 95% of the patient, with a mean complete wound healing time of 29 ± 12 days. The incomplete healing rate (5%) was significantly related to the number of external openings (p = 0.008), and recurrence was reported in six cases (5.1%). Normal daily activity was established on the first postoperative day, and the mean duration before patients returned to work was 3 days. QoL significantly increased between the preoperative stage and 30 days after the EPSiT procedure (45.3 vs. 7.9; p < 0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The EPSiT procedure seems to be a safe and effective technique in treating even complex recurrent PD. It enables excellent short- and long-term outcomes than various other techniques that are more invasive.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30719564
doi: 10.1007/s00384-019-03256-8
pii: 10.1007/s00384-019-03256-8
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Langues
eng
Pagination
741-746Références
JAMA Surg. 2016 Jun 1;151(6):547-53
pubmed: 26819186
Am Surg. 2007 Oct;73(10):1075-8
pubmed: 17983085
Surgery. 1980 May;87(5):567-72
pubmed: 7368107
Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2015 Jun;25(3):e95-7
pubmed: 26018049
Colorectal Dis. 2012 Feb;14(2):143-51
pubmed: 20969718
Colorectal Dis. 2016 May;18(5):O164-70
pubmed: 26946340
Dis Colon Rectum. 2009 Mar;52(3):496-502
pubmed: 19333052
Dis Colon Rectum. 2008 Nov;51(11):1656-62; discussion 1662-3
pubmed: 18516645
Tech Coloproctol. 2018 May;22(5):325-331
pubmed: 29850944
Lancet. 1973 Dec 22;2(7843):1414-5
pubmed: 4128725
Dis Colon Rectum. 2017 Apr;60(4):405-407
pubmed: 28267008
Surg Endosc. 2018 Apr;32(4):2084-2093
pubmed: 29052068
Dis Colon Rectum. 1983 Dec;26(12):800-7
pubmed: 6641463
Clinics (Sao Paulo). 2015 May;70(5):350-5
pubmed: 26039952
World J Surg. 2010 Jan;34(1):153-7
pubmed: 19820992
Tech Coloproctol. 2011 Dec;15(4):417-22
pubmed: 22002535
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007 Oct 17;(4):CD006213
pubmed: 17943897
World J Surg. 2013 May;37(5):1115-20
pubmed: 23435676
Surgery. 2014 Mar;155(3):562-6
pubmed: 24300343
JSLS. 2017 Jul-Sep;21(3):
pubmed: 28904522
Tech Coloproctol. 2014 Apr;18(4):389-92
pubmed: 23681300
Am J Surg. 2009 Feb;197(2):189-92
pubmed: 18639221
Dis Colon Rectum. 2013 Sep;56(9):1021-7
pubmed: 23929010