Techniques in coloproctology · 2026
Sinus laser-assisted closure (SiLaC) in pilonidal sinus disease: a multicenter cohort study.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
de Kort J, van Kempen L V, Schouten R, Brokx H, Erkens R, Amir A M I, Vriens M R, Smakman E F A, Smakman N, Furnee E J B
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Sinus laser-assisted closure (SiLaC) is gaining popularity as a minimally invasive surgical technique to treat chronic sacrococcygeal pilonidal sinus disease (SPSD). However, long-term outcomes on this technique are rarely reported in the literature. This multicenter study aimed to report the mid-term outcome of a cohort of patients who underwent SiLaC treatment for primary or recurrent SPSD.
METHODS: Patients with primary or recurrent SPSD were included in this retrospective cohort study. Data were collected from medical records, and a validated questionnaire was distributed to all patients at follow-up to assess symptoms, quality of life, and the need for additional surgery.
RESULTS: A total of 231 patients were included, with a median follow-up of 33 months (IQR 20-44): 128 patients underwent SiLaC for primary SPSD and 103 for recurrent SPSD. Additional interventions were required in 35 patients with primary SPSD (27.3%) and in 30 patients with recurrent SPSD (29.1%). Repeat SiLaC alone, i.e. no other surgical treatment than repeat SiLaC, was performed in 25 patients (19.6%) in the primary group and 22 patients (21.4%) in the recurrent group. Treatment failure, defined as persistent symptoms and/or the need for surgery other than SiLaC, occurred in 23 patients (18.0%) in the primary group and in 21 patients (20.4%) in the recurrent group. However, SPSD-related symptoms were low at follow-up, and quality of life measured by the SF-36 was reported to be even higher than in the general USA population, both in the primary and recurrent group.
CONCLUSIONS: SiLaC for primary and recurrent SPSD appeared to be a safe procedure with excellent symptom control and quality of life, with only 7.8% of patients in both groups requiring other surgical treatment than SiLaC.
METHODS: Patients with primary or recurrent SPSD were included in this retrospective cohort study. Data were collected from medical records, and a validated questionnaire was distributed to all patients at follow-up to assess symptoms, quality of life, and the need for additional surgery.
RESULTS: A total of 231 patients were included, with a median follow-up of 33 months (IQR 20-44): 128 patients underwent SiLaC for primary SPSD and 103 for recurrent SPSD. Additional interventions were required in 35 patients with primary SPSD (27.3%) and in 30 patients with recurrent SPSD (29.1%). Repeat SiLaC alone, i.e. no other surgical treatment than repeat SiLaC, was performed in 25 patients (19.6%) in the primary group and 22 patients (21.4%) in the recurrent group. Treatment failure, defined as persistent symptoms and/or the need for surgery other than SiLaC, occurred in 23 patients (18.0%) in the primary group and in 21 patients (20.4%) in the recurrent group. However, SPSD-related symptoms were low at follow-up, and quality of life measured by the SF-36 was reported to be even higher than in the general USA population, both in the primary and recurrent group.
CONCLUSIONS: SiLaC for primary and recurrent SPSD appeared to be a safe procedure with excellent symptom control and quality of life, with only 7.8% of patients in both groups requiring other surgical treatment than SiLaC.