Cargando…
A mapping review of sacrococcygeal pilonidal sinus disease
BACKGROUND: Pilonidal sinus is a hole in the natal cleft which may cause severe pain and become infected. The evidence base for management of pilonidal sinus is said to be poor quality, poorly focused and rapidly proliferating. We undertook a systematic mapping review to provide a broad overview of...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer International Publishing
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8124060/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33728570 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10151-021-02432-9 |
_version_ | 1783693097624928256 |
---|---|
author | Kumar, M. Clay, W. H. Lee, M. J. Brown, S. R. Hind, D. |
author_facet | Kumar, M. Clay, W. H. Lee, M. J. Brown, S. R. Hind, D. |
author_sort | Kumar, M. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Pilonidal sinus is a hole in the natal cleft which may cause severe pain and become infected. The evidence base for management of pilonidal sinus is said to be poor quality, poorly focused and rapidly proliferating. We undertook a systematic mapping review to provide a broad overview of the field and support the identification of research priorities. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, and EMBASE from inception to 22nd Nov 2020 for primary research studies focused on the management of pilonidal sinus. We extracted data on study design and categorised studies under five major headings (‘non-surgical treatment’, ‘surgical treatment’, ‘aftercare’ and ‘other’), producing frequency counts for different study designs. Gaps in research were identified from published systematic reviews and tabulated. RESULTS: We identified 983 eligible studies, of which 36 were systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses; 121 were randomised controlled trials), and 826 observational studies of various design. The majority of studies evaluated surgical techniques (n = 665), or adjuvant medical interventions (n = 98). The literature on wound care has developed most recently, and the evidence base includes 30% randomised controlled trials. Gaps analysis highlighted comparison of surgical techniques including flaps, laser depilation, and wound care interventions as potential areas for randomised controlled trials. CONCLUSIONS: This mapping review summarises eight decades of research on the management of pilonidal sinus. Further research is needed to identify front-running interventions, understand variation in practice and patient values, and to prioritise future research. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10151-021-02432-9. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8124060 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Springer International Publishing |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-81240602021-05-26 A mapping review of sacrococcygeal pilonidal sinus disease Kumar, M. Clay, W. H. Lee, M. J. Brown, S. R. Hind, D. Tech Coloproctol Review BACKGROUND: Pilonidal sinus is a hole in the natal cleft which may cause severe pain and become infected. The evidence base for management of pilonidal sinus is said to be poor quality, poorly focused and rapidly proliferating. We undertook a systematic mapping review to provide a broad overview of the field and support the identification of research priorities. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, and EMBASE from inception to 22nd Nov 2020 for primary research studies focused on the management of pilonidal sinus. We extracted data on study design and categorised studies under five major headings (‘non-surgical treatment’, ‘surgical treatment’, ‘aftercare’ and ‘other’), producing frequency counts for different study designs. Gaps in research were identified from published systematic reviews and tabulated. RESULTS: We identified 983 eligible studies, of which 36 were systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses; 121 were randomised controlled trials), and 826 observational studies of various design. The majority of studies evaluated surgical techniques (n = 665), or adjuvant medical interventions (n = 98). The literature on wound care has developed most recently, and the evidence base includes 30% randomised controlled trials. Gaps analysis highlighted comparison of surgical techniques including flaps, laser depilation, and wound care interventions as potential areas for randomised controlled trials. CONCLUSIONS: This mapping review summarises eight decades of research on the management of pilonidal sinus. Further research is needed to identify front-running interventions, understand variation in practice and patient values, and to prioritise future research. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10151-021-02432-9. Springer International Publishing 2021-03-16 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC8124060/ /pubmed/33728570 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10151-021-02432-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Review Kumar, M. Clay, W. H. Lee, M. J. Brown, S. R. Hind, D. A mapping review of sacrococcygeal pilonidal sinus disease |
title | A mapping review of sacrococcygeal pilonidal sinus disease |
title_full | A mapping review of sacrococcygeal pilonidal sinus disease |
title_fullStr | A mapping review of sacrococcygeal pilonidal sinus disease |
title_full_unstemmed | A mapping review of sacrococcygeal pilonidal sinus disease |
title_short | A mapping review of sacrococcygeal pilonidal sinus disease |
title_sort | mapping review of sacrococcygeal pilonidal sinus disease |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8124060/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33728570 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10151-021-02432-9 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT kumarm amappingreviewofsacrococcygealpilonidalsinusdisease AT claywh amappingreviewofsacrococcygealpilonidalsinusdisease AT leemj amappingreviewofsacrococcygealpilonidalsinusdisease AT brownsr amappingreviewofsacrococcygealpilonidalsinusdisease AT hindd amappingreviewofsacrococcygealpilonidalsinusdisease AT kumarm mappingreviewofsacrococcygealpilonidalsinusdisease AT claywh mappingreviewofsacrococcygealpilonidalsinusdisease AT leemj mappingreviewofsacrococcygealpilonidalsinusdisease AT brownsr mappingreviewofsacrococcygealpilonidalsinusdisease AT hindd mappingreviewofsacrococcygealpilonidalsinusdisease |