Open versus Closed Surgery for Axillary Osmidrosis: A Meta-Analysis of Articles Published in Four Languages

BACKGROUND: Individuals with axillary osmidrosis suffer detrimental effects to their psychosocial functioning. In Asian nations, major operations for axillary osmidrosis include subdermal excision (open surgery) and suction-curettage (closed surgery). OBJECTIVE: The aim of this meta-analysis was to determine which of these two procedures is most favorable in terms of safety and efficacy. METHODS: According to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Metaanalyses (PRISMA) guideline, we searched electronic databases for articles published in English, Japanese, Korean, and Chinese languages. Fixed-effects model meta-analyses of odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were conducted, and the I(2) was used to assess heterogeneity. Complication rates, recurrence/ineffectiveness rates, and patient satisfaction data were extracted and compared between open and closed surgeries. RESULTS: Our search yielded 8 articles that include 1,179 patients; 560 underwent open surgery, and 619 underwent closed surgery. Our meta-analysis revealed that suction-curettage had a significantly lower risk of acute adverse events than open excision (OR, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.07~0.32), whereas open excision was significantly superior to suction-curettage for recurrence/ineffectiveness rate (OR, 2.90; 95% CI, 1.37~6.15). Patient satisfaction was equally high with both treatments (OR, 1.58; 95% CI, 0.69~3.60). CONCLUSION: Since surgical treatments for axillary osmidrosis have been performed mostly in East Asian nations, it was meaningful to review articles published in four languages. This meta-analysis revealed that closed surgery was safer but less effective than open surgery. However, both patient groups expressed high satisfaction with the outcomes. Our results may be helpful for deciding surgical treatment options.