[Comparison of Treatments for an Infected Pilonidal Sinus: Differences in Scar Quality and Outcome Between Secondary Wound Healing and Limberg Flap in a Prospective Study].
OBJECTIVE
There are various options for wound treatment after the excision of a pilonidal sinus. The aim of our study was to compare secondary healing to Limberg flap wound closure, with a focus on scar quality and patient complaints, rate of recurrence, period of absence from work as well as functional and aesthetic results one year after surgery.


METHODS
33 out of 55 patients who underwent pilonidal sinus excision in our department (KlinikumStadtSoest, Soest, Germany) between 2011 and 2012 were enrolled in the study. 16 of these 33 patients had chosen secondary wound healing and 17 were treated with a Limberg flap for defect coverage. First and foremost, we aimed to objectify scar quality and elasticity by measuring the parameters of skin distensibility and mobility. To this end, we used a self-developed method to ascertain the sacral lumbar skin distension quotient (SL quotient) as well as sacral skin mobility. 100 healthy volunteers served as a control group. Also we collected information about pain, time of absence from work and frequency of recurrence and asked patients about their satisfaction with the functional and aesthetic results.


RESULTS
The results for the sacral lumbar skin distension quotient were significantly better after Limberg flap wound closure compared with secondary wound healing. As regards distensibility, there was a marked trend to more favourable values in the Limberg group. No differences in distensibility and mobility were observed between the Limberg group and the control group, whereas skin distensibility was significantly reduced (p=0.001) in secondary healing compared with the control group. Time off work was significantly longer in secondary healing (mean 63 days) than after Limberg flap (mean 29 days). No differences were identified regarding patient satisfaction, pain scores and frequency of recurrence.


CONCLUSIONS
Wound closure via Limberg flap after the excision of an infected pilonidal sinus not only helps to reduce absence from work, but also produces a scar which is more distensible and movable compared with secondary healing. Patient satisfaction and pain scores were very good in both groups, with no differences observed by us. We are planning to collect more data with a bigger sample of patients and a longer follow-up period in future studies. For the time being, we will continue to provide both treatment methods to our patients.
KlinikumStadtSoest, Klinik für Plastische, Hand- und Wiederherstellungschirurgie, Soest.
S
S
Dahmann
LKH-Univ. Klinikum Graz, Klinische Abteilung für Plastische, Ästhetische und Rekonstruktive Chirurgie, Universitätsklinik für Chirurgie, Graz, Austria.
P B
PB
Lebo
KlinikumStadtSoest, Klinik für Plastische, Hand- und Wiederherstellungschirurgie, Soest.
M V
MV
Meyer-Marcotty
D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D001424:Bacterial Infections / Q000503:physiopathology* / Q000601:surgery*; D002921:Cicatrix / Q000209:etiology* / Q000503:physiopathology*; D004954:Esthetics; D005260:Female; D005858:Germany; D019983:Guideline Adherence; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D017060:Patient Satisfaction; D010864:Pilonidal Sinus / Q000503:physiopathology* / Q000601:surgery*; D011183:Postoperative Complications / Q000209:etiology* / Q000503:physiopathology*; D019651:Plastic Surgery Procedures / Q000379:methods*; D012008:Recurrence; D013524:Surgical Flaps / Q000502:physiology / Q000601:surgery*; D014945:Wound Healing / Q000502:physiology*; D055815:Young Adult