RESUMO
AIM: To test the efficacy of lay open (deroofing, not excision) with curettage under local anesthesia (LOCULA) for pilonidal sinus as an outpatient procedure. METHODS: LOCULA procedure was done for all types of pilonidal disease. The primary outcome measure was cure rate. The secondary outcome measures were hospital stay, operating time, return to work, healing time and complication rate. RESULTS: Thirty-three (M/F-30/3, mean age-23.4 ± 5.8 years) consecutive patients were operated and followed for 24 mo (6-46 mo). Eleven were pilonidal abscess and 22 were chronic pilonidal disease. Six had recurrent disease. Operating time and the hospital stay was 22.3 ± 5.6 min and 63.8 ± 22.3 min respectively. The patients could resume normal work in 4.3 ± 3.2 d and the healing time was 42.9 ± 8.1 d. Thirty (93.8%) patients had complete resolution of the disease and two (6.2%) had a recurrence. Both the recurrences happened in patients who had complete healing but ignored the prescribed recommendations. One out of these got cured after getting operated again with the same procedure. Thus the overall success rate of this procedure was 96.9%. CONCLUSION: Lay open (deroofing) with curettage procedure under local anesthesia is an effective procedure to treat both simple and complicated pilonidal sinus and abscess. It is a simple procedure, has a high cure rate (up to 97%), doesn't require admission and is associated with minimal morbidity and scarring. Considering the distinct advantages, this procedure has the potential to become the first line procedure for treating pilonidal disease.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The balance between abdominal and perineal approaches for rectal prolapse is always the higher morbidity but better outcome in the former setting. Therefore, perineal approaches have been preferred for the treatment of full-thickness rectal prolapse (FTRP) in elderly patients. However, laparoscopic rectopexy with or without resection also may be used for elderly patients and may confer the same benefits. PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to evaluate safety and efficacy of laparoscopic rectopexy compared with perineal rectosigmoidectomy for FTRP in elderly patients. METHODS: Between July 2000 and June 2009, eight consecutive patients (8 women; mean age, 71 (range, 65-77) years) with FTRP underwent laparoscopic rectopexy (LAP group). During the same period, 143 patients underwent perineal rectosigmoidectomy (PRS group). A total of 123 patients were selected who underwent perineal rectosigmoidectomy (117 women; mean age, 80.7 (range, 66-98) years). RESULTS: Three patients (37.5%) in the LAP group and 29 patients (23.6%) in the PRS group had undergone previous operations for rectal prolapse. The mean follow-up periods were 6.9 months and 12.8 months, respectively. In the LAP group, operative time was longer (166.5 vs. 73.5 minutes; p > 0.05) and bleeding loss was more (101.7 vs. 31.6; p < 0.05), whereas the length of hospitalization was same between the two groups (5.4 vs. 5.3 days; p > 0.05). Postoperative complications included an incisional hernia in the LAP group (12.5%) and urinary retention (4.8%), anastomotic disruption (2.4%), urinary tract infection (1.6%), and atelectasis (1.6%) in the PRS group (13.8%). Recurrences were 1 (12.5%) in the LAP group and 14 (11.4%) in the PRS group. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic rectopexy is a safe and feasible procedure in elderly patients with FTRP but results in increased operative time.
