Viewing Study NCT06021392


Ignite Creation Date: 2025-12-24 @ 3:40 PM
Ignite Modification Date: 2025-12-27 @ 7:08 AM
Study NCT ID: NCT06021392
Status: UNKNOWN
Last Update Posted: 2023-09-07
First Post: 2023-08-28
Is NOT Gene Therapy: True
Has Adverse Events: False

Brief Title: Comparative Study Between Wide Local Excision and Minimal Excision of Pilonidal Sinus
Sponsor: Abanoub emad fayez
Organization:

Study Overview

Official Title: Comparative Study Between Wide Local Excision and Minimal Excision of Pilonidal Sinus
Status: UNKNOWN
Status Verified Date: 2023-09
Last Known Status: NOT_YET_RECRUITING
Delayed Posting: No
If Stopped, Why?: Not Stopped
Has Expanded Access: False
If Expanded Access, NCT#: N/A
Has Expanded Access, NCT# Status: N/A
Acronym: None
Brief Summary: Comparative study between wide local excision and minimal excision of pilonidal sinus
Detailed Description: Pilonidal sinus (PNS) disease is distributed in young adults who are supposed to be healthy with maximum productivity. Wide local excision creates a tissue gap, while the concept of minimal excision preserves healthy tissues with minimal tissue gap.

Pilonidal disease is a frequent suppurative condition that occurs twice as often in men as in women, usually between the ages of 15 and 30. Pilonidal disease is located beneath the skin of the sacro-coccygeal region. It presents acutely as an abscess under tension while the chronic form gives rise to intermittent discharge from pilonidal sinus(es). Diagnosis is clinical and usually straightforward. In the large majority of cases, treatment is surgical but there is no consensus as to the 'ideal' technique. Acute abscess must be evacuated and an off-midline incision seems preferable. Excision is the standard definitive treatment but the choice of wide versus limited excision on the school of thought. Minimal excision or debridement of the sinus and/or cavity through a midline or a separate paramedian excision can also be performed, leaving the wounds open or closed. These methods are simple and cost-efficient, and associated with low pain, rapid healing, and a rapid return to normal activity. A disadvantage is the higher recurrence rate; however, these methods can be used repeatedly for recurrences. Although recurrence rates seem high at first glance, the procedures can be successfully repeated for recurrences, achieving healing rates of over 90% for 1-2 interventions. Future well-designed trials are necessary to aid patient selection.

Study Oversight

Has Oversight DMC: None
Is a FDA Regulated Drug?: False
Is a FDA Regulated Device?: False
Is an Unapproved Device?: None
Is a PPSD?: None
Is a US Export?: None
Is an FDA AA801 Violation?: