OUTCOME OF OPEN VERSUS CLOSED SURGICAL TECHNIQUE FOR TREATMENT OF CHRONIC PILONIDAL SINUS: A RANDOMIZED CONTROL TRIAL
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcome of “excision with leaving open” versus “excision with primary closure” of chronic pilonidal sinus (PNS) of saccrococygeal area in terms of hospital stay, wound healing, return to work and postoperative complications.
METHODOLOGY: This study was conducted at surgical unit Divisional Headquarter Hospital Kohat, Pakistan during the period April 2007 to April 2009. Thirty confirmed cases of chronic PNS were included in the study. Patients were randomly assigned to two groups i.e. group-A (excision with leaving open) & group-B (excision with primary closure). Data was collected prospectively on structured proforma. Patients were regularly followed up for 2 years for complications. Statistical analysis was done by using SPSS version 14.
RESULTS: Out of 30 patients, 26 (86.7%) were males and 4 (13.3%) were females with mean age of 28.47+/-9.75 years. Group-A included 16 (53.30%) patients while Group-B included 14(46.70%) patients. The patientsin group-B had shorter hospital stay (3.5+ 0.6504 vs. 4.7+0.5774 days, p <0.01), faster recovery (2.78+0.6993 vs. 7.15+1.0602 weeks, p<0.01) and earlier return to work (16.42+5.4591 vs. 29 + 3.7238 days, p<0.01). No significant difference was found in both the groups in terms of short and long term postoperative complications. Wound Infection (n=5/30; 16.7%) and itching 5 (n=5/30; 16.7%) were the commonest short term complication while recurrence (n=3/30; 10%) and hypertrophicscar (n=3/30; 10%) were the commonest long term complications.
CONCLUSION: Closed method was found to be better than open method in chronic pilonidal sinus in terms of recovery, hospital stay and time of work.
KEY WORDS: Pilonidal sinus disease, Randomized controlled trial, Postoperative complications, outcome.
Article Details
Work published in KMUJ is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online
(e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.