Pilonidal Sinus Management; Bascom Flap Versus Pilonidal Pits Excision: A Single-Center Experience

Abstract

Purpose This study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of the Bascom cleft lift (flap) and the pilonidal pits excision (Gips procedure). Methods The records of all the patients who underwent pilonidal sinus excision between November 2013 and August 2017 were reviewed. Inclusion criteria included either pilonidal pits excision or the Bascom cleft lift procedure. All procedures were performed by a single surgeon. Perioperative complications and recurrence rates were reviewed. Results Fifty-three patients met the inclusion criteria. Male/female ratio was 36/17, with a mean age of 23.4 ± 7 years. In this study, 21 patients underwent the Bascom cleft lift (skin flap) procedure and 32 underwent the Gips-style operation. The mean follow-up was 3.5 months. Twenty-eight patients (52.8%) underwent prior drainage of pilonidal abscess. Eleven patients had a previous wide local excision with recurrent disease. A higher rate of recurrence was observed among patients who underwent pits picking following failure of a previous wide local excision (80% vs. 0%, P = 0.02). Minor wound dehiscence developed in 8 patients; all of which were in the Bascom flap group (40% vs. 0%, P < 0.005). All of these wounds healed completely between 3 and 6 weeks. Conclusion The Gips procedure is the recommended treatment for simple pilonidal disease. For recurrent pilonidal disease, the Bascom cleft lift (flap) procedure is an excellent option since it demonstrates a short wound healing time and a good success rate. This calls into question the continued use of the wide excision technique used by most surgeons in this country and abroad.

Keywords

• pilonidal sinus
• minimally invasive surgical procedures
• abscess
• drainage
• surgical flaps