背景:这项研究的目的是调查是否在内镜下毛发窦治疗(EPSIT)中增加激光,激光辅助EPSIT(LEPSIT)对治疗藏毛窦疾病(PSD)的方法和临床结果有影响。
方法:在2019年9月至2020年9月之间,在BursaMedicana医院接受了PSDLEPSIT和EPSIT程序的患者,土耳其,年龄匹配,坑的位置和数量,体重指数(BMI),和性爱。主要终点是伤口完全愈合,次要终点是生活质量,美容效果,和成本。
结果:24例LEPSIT患者与72例EPSIT患者相匹配。纳入的患者中有81例(84.4%)为男性,中位年龄为26岁(范围16-52岁)。中位随访时间为9个月(3-15个月)。伤口愈合率(LEPSIT;95.8%vs.EPSIT;93%;p=0.99)两组相似。在接受LEPSIT的患者中,手术时间(p=0.00086)明显缩短,恢复工作所需的时间(p=0.03572)和伤口闭合时间(p<0.00001)显著缩短.然而,两组恢复日常活动所需的时间和伤口并发症的百分比相似.术后第1、7和14天的疼痛评分在EPSIT后显著升高(分别为p=0.0083、p=0.00054和p=0.0479)。EPSIT后的术后镇痛需求显着增加(p=0.01492)。接受EPSIT的患者的总住院费用明显较低(p<0.00001)。在LEPSIT程序中观察到明显更好的美容改善(p=0.00694)。除了身体疼痛(LEPSIT后更好)外,第一个月的生活质量(用简短表格36健康调查问卷评估)相似。
结论:LEPSIT和EPSIT的成功率相似。LEPSIT导致更好的伤口愈合和患者舒适度,和更短的时间返回工作。
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to investigate whether the addition of laser to the endoscopic pilonidal sinus treatment (EPSIT), laser-assisted EPSIT (LEPSIT) has an effect on the method and clinical results in the treatment of pilonidal sinus disease (PSD).
METHODS: Between September 2019 and September 2020, patients who underwent LEPSIT and EPSIT procedures for PSD at Bursa Medicana Hospital, Turkey, were matched for age, pit location and number, body mass index (BMI), and sex. The primary endpoint was complete wound healing and the secondary endpoints were quality of life, cosmetic results, and cost.
RESULTS: Twenty-four LEPSIT patients were matched to 72 EPSIT patients. Eighty-one (84.4%) of the included patients were male, and the median age was 26 years (range 16-52 years). The median follow-up time was 9 months (range 3-15 months).Wound healing rates (LEPSIT; 95.8% vs. EPSIT; 93%; p = 0.99) were similar in both groups. In patients who underwent LEPSIT, the operative time (p = 0.00086) was significantly shorter, time taken to return to work (p = 0.03572) and wound closure (p < 0.00001) were significantly less. However, the time taken to return to daily activities and the percentage of wound complications were similar in both groups. The pain scores on postoperative -days 1 7, and 14 were significantly higher after EPSIT (p = 0.0083, p = 0.00054, and p = 0.0479, respectively). The postoperative analgesic requirement was significantly higher after EPSIT (p = 0.01492). The total hospital cost was significantly less in patients who underwent EPSIT (p < 0.00001). Significantly better cosmetic improvement was observed in LEPSIT procedure (p = 0.00694). First month quality of life (evaluated with the Short Form 36 Health Survey Questionnaire) was similar except for bodily pain (better after LEPSIT).
CONCLUSIONS: The success rates of LEPSIT and EPSIT are similar. LEPSIT results in better wound healing and patient comfort, and a shorter time to return to work.