Randomized comparison of Limberg flap versus modified primary closure for the treatment of pilonidal disease

BackgroundThe best surgical technique for sacrococcygeal pilonidal disease is still controversial. The aim of this randomized prospective trial was to compare both the results of Limberg flap procedure and primary closure.MethodsA total of 260 patients with sacrococcygeal pilonidal disease were assigned randomly to undergo Limberg flap procedure or tension-free primary closure.ResultsSuccess of surgery was achieved in 84.62% of Limberg flap patients versus 77.69% of primary closure (P = .0793). Surgical time for primary closure was shorter. Wound infection was more frequent in the primary closure group (P = .0254), which experienced less postoperative pain (P < .0001). No significant difference was found in time off from work (P = .672) and wound dehiscence. Recurrence was observed in 3.84% versus 0% in the primary closure versus Limberg flap group (P = .153).ConclusionsOur results do not show a clear benefit for surgical management by Limberg flap or primary closure. Limberg flap showed less convalescence and wound infection; our technique of tension-free primary closure was a day case procedure, less painful, and shorter than Limberg flap.