الفهرس 
Introduction:Only 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 155 |  |  |
| | | from | 155 | | |
Abstract
The surgical approach to symptomatic pilonidal sinus is open to debate. Many techniques have been described and no single technique fulfils all the requirements of an ideal treatment. Ambulatory treatment with minimal morbidity and rapid return to activity is desirable. Many treatment modalities have been tried for the treatment of pilonidal disease including phenol injection, cryosurgery, shaving, incision and curettage, excision with primary closure, excision with open packing, excision with marsupialization, excision with skin grafting and recently flap surgery. An ideal operation for pilonidal disease should be simple procedure that is easy to learn, to teach, procedure with low postoperative morbidity, acceptable time to return to work, and low recurrence rate, with short hospital stay. In this study we offer the In-Rolling closure technique which is a compromise between the open and closed techniques inspired from marsipulization with shorter wound care duration and lower recurrence rates.
This study include 21 patients 14 of which were operated using the In-Rolling closure technique while the other 7 patients were operated using the open technique in the surgical department
SUMMARY
111
of Menoufiya University Hospital and Sammanoud General Hospital from March 2011 to February 2012 with a follow up period ranging between 12 and 24 month. The results of the both techniques were compared with each other and also compared with other studies using different techniques regarding the hospital stay, return to daily activity, return to work, postoperative bleeding, infection rates, time for complete wound healing and recurrence rates. The result of these comparisons shows that the In-Rolling closure technique is superior to the other techniques regarding the simplicity of the technique, hospital stay, return to daily activity and work, postoperative bleeding, infection rates, time of complete wound healing and recurrence rates. As it combine the advantages of open techniques and the advantages of closed ones and it overcome the disadvantages of both of them. On conclusion this technique is a simple technique easy to learn, teach and to be performed with short hospital stay, low infection rates, fast return to daily activity and work, short wound care duration, low cost and low recurrence rates.