ArticleRevista do Colegio Brasileiro de Cirurgioes2026
Recurrence Patterns in Pilonidal Sinus Disease Surgery: Navigating Misclassifications and Early Complications.
Article in Revista do Colegio Brasileiro de Cirurgioes, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Surgical Treatment Outcomes for Primary Pilonidal Sinus Disease: A Single-Centre Retrospective Study of 2222 Patients (2006-2020).International wound journal · 2026Article
- Shrinking follow-up duration in pilonidal sinus surgery, 1970-2020: a patient-weighted longitudinal analysis of 2,285 studies.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionWound healing problems are common after Pilonidal Sinus Disease (PSD) surgery and may come misclassified as recurrence during the first 6-12 postop. month. We hypothesized that misclassification of post-operative wound complications as recurrence would be reflected when comparing early and late annual recurrence rates.
methodsThe postop. recurrence rate was analyzed in 1,254 studies encompassing 2,030 study treatment groups (n=140,472 patients), follow-up-studies <1year (n=304 studies) versus studies with longer FUP (n=950 studies). Recurrence rate was calculated for groups and subanalysis done for therapeutic strategies in this observational study.
resultsFirst-year recurrence rate (RR) was markedly higher in the studies with <1-year follow-up compared to studies with ≥1-year follow-up (median RR 6.0%/year vs. 2.0%/year, RD=4.0%). Examining individual therapies' recurrences after primary open treatment saw 8%/year versus 2.5%/year (RD=5.5%) RR, for primary midline closure 20%/year vs. 3.2%/year (RD=16.8%) and Pit Picking 20.7%/year vs. 4.0%/year (RD=16.7%).
conclusionThe one-year RR is containing a respectable portion of misclassifications (untrue recurrences) that may exceed the true recurrence rate by a factor of 3-5. If reliable recurrence rate needs to be determined, follow ups of <one year should be avoided. Studies of n=200 participants and larger exhibit a smaller chance of recurrence rate error and should be aimed for if possible. What does this paper add to the literature? This is the first work to quantify the amount of misclassification of "recurrences" within the first year following PSD surgery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.