↓ Skip to main content

A New Oval Advancement Flap Design for Reconstruction of Pilonidal Sinus Defect

Overview of attention for article published in World Journal of Surgery, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
18 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A New Oval Advancement Flap Design for Reconstruction of Pilonidal Sinus Defect
Published in
World Journal of Surgery, April 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00268-018-4648-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Enver Arpaci, Serdar Altun, Erkan Orhan, Atilla Eyuboglu, Nilgun Markal Ertas

Abstract

Pilonidal sinus is a common chronic disease of the sacrococcygeal region. Although many surgical methods have been described for treating pilonidal sinus disease, controversy still exists as to the best surgical technique. The aim of this study is to present a new modified advancement flap technique named "omega flap" for the treatment of pilonidal sinus disease. This study included 18 patients with pilonidal sinus who were treated between March 2012 and August 2014. All cases underwent oval excision and omega advancement flap reconstruction. Defect size, postoperative complications, postoperative pain, painless sitting time, patient satisfaction and recurrence were evaluated retrospectively. All patients were discharged on the first postoperative day. There was no flap necrosis. No recurrence and no major complication were observed during follow-up period. The outcomes were also satisfactory regarding functionally and aesthetically, and the patients were satisfied with the results. Presented method has a different geometry than classical advancement flap methods. Our technique provides two-layered repair with minimal tension and off-midline closure for the reconstruction of pilonidal sinus defect. It is easily performed, reliable, associated with no recurrens and good aesthetic results.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 18 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 22%
Other 3 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 17%
Student > Bachelor 2 11%
Researcher 2 11%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 3 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 44%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 11%
Unspecified 1 6%
Unknown 7 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 May 2018.
All research outputs
#15,508,366
of 23,047,237 outputs
Outputs from World Journal of Surgery
#3,068
of 4,267 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#207,448
of 325,398 outputs
Outputs of similar age from World Journal of Surgery
#46
of 65 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,047,237 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,267 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.6. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 325,398 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 65 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.