Correction to: Conservative Sinusectomy vs. excision and primary off-midline closure for pilonidal disease: a randomized controlled trial.

The original version of this article, unfortunately, contained an error. The given names and family names of the authors were interchanged and are now presented correctly. The original article has been corrected.].

Conservative Sinusectomy vs. excision and primary off-midline closure for pilonidal disease: a randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE: Pilonidal sinus disease (PD) is a common acquired disease, responsible for discomfort and time off work. There is currently no consensus on the best surgical therapy. We aimed at comparing conservative sinusectomy (S) to excision and paramedian primary closure (PC). METHODS: This is a randomized controlled trial compatible with the CONSORT statement standards. We included all patients with chronic PD between 2012 and 2017. We excluded patients with acute abscesses, recurrent PD after surgery with a curative intent and patients needing complex reconstructions with rotation flaps. Patients with chronic symptomatic PD were randomized to S or PC. Primary end-point was the rate of patients healed at 3 weeks, secondary outcomes were total healing time, pain, time off work, patient satisfaction and recurrence at 1 year. Patients were seen at a wound clinic until healed and contacted at 3, 6, and 12 months for follow-up. RESULTS: After inclusion of 58 patients the study was stopped prematurely due to discrepancy between expected and observed outcomes. Only 4/30 (13.3%) patients in the S group had healed completely at 3 weeks compared with 14/28 (50%) in the PC group (p = 0.01). Median time to complete healing was 54 (23-328) days in the S group compared to 34 (13-141) in the PC group (p = 0.025). Number of outpatient visits, time off work, analgesia requirement, and recurrence rates at 12 months 4 (16%) in the S group and 3 (11.1%) in the PC group (p = 0.548) were similar. CONCLUSIONS: PC leads to faster healing compared to S, with similar healthcare burden. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was approved by the local ethics committee and registered in www.clinicaltrials.gov (REF: NCT03271996). The study was carried out at the Regional Hospital of Lugano, Switzerland.

ERAS, length of stay and private insurance: a retrospective study.

PURPOSE: Hospital discharge after colorectal resection within an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) program occurs earlier compared to standard-care postoperative pathways but often later than what objective criteria of "readiness for discharge" could allow. The aim of this study was to analyse reasons and risk factors of such discharge delay. METHODS: All elective patients admitted for colorectal resection at the regional Hospital of Lugano in 2014 and 2015 were included. The postoperative day on which patients fulfilled consensus agreed criteria (according to Fiore) for readiness for discharge (POD-F) and the effective day of discharge (POD-D) were determined. We analysed the reasons for discharge delay (POD-D>POD-F) and performed univariate and multivariate analysis to determine risk factors. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-eight patients were included in the study. Median POD-F was 5 (2-48) days, POD-D was 6 (3-50) days. In 94 patients, POD-D occurred later than POD-F with a median delay of 1 (1-11) days. Reasons for discharge delay were insufficient social support in 13 (14%), patient's preference in 39 (41%) and medical team preference in 41 (44%). Private insurance (OR 2.61, 95%CI 1.08-6.34, p = 0.034) and patient discharged on a day other than Monday (OR 2.94, 95%CI 1.16-7.14, p = 0.023) were independent predictors for discharge delay. CONCLUSION: Even when objective criteria for readiness for discharge have been fulfilled, patients and/or doctors often do not feel comfortable with hospital discharge at this time point. Length of stay, even within an ERAS program, is still influenced by several non-medical factors and is therefore not a precise surrogate marker of outcomes.