Unveiling Observation Bias in Pilonidal Sinus Disease Studies: A Comparative Analysis of Study Designs and Follow-Up Protocols

<b>Introduction:</b> The extent of observation bias in long-term surgical outcomes due to inadequate or unplanned follow-up in pilonidal sinus disease (PSD) studies is unclear. We made a hypothesis on the high risk of underreported recurrence in studies relying on the patients returning in case of recurrent disease (return on recurrence; ROR).<b>Aim:</b> To investigate and quantify the amount of bias associated with regular <i>vs.</i> return-on-recurrence follow-up of patients.<b>Materials and methods:</b> A total of 5.485 retrievable PSD publications were screened for eligibility, yielding 1.222 PSD studies with 135.349 patients treated, published between 1833 and 2023, included for analysis. Of these, 139 were Randomized Controlled Trials (RCT), 54 were ROR trials, and 1,029 were non-RCT non-ROR (N) trials. Recurrence rates were compared between groups<b>Results:</b> The five-year recurrence rates across all treatments in PSD were 18.9% for RCTs, 10.4% for N trials, and 12.4% forROR trials. Recurrence rates in the N and the ROR trials were statistically indistinguishable at ten-year follow-up (p = 0.1),whereas RCTs show significantly higher recurrence rates than N or ROR at 10-year follow-ups (p<0.001, p<0.001). Comparingonly primary open treatment, the five-year recurrence rate was 18.6% for RCT trials, 11.5% for N trials, and 4.1% for ROR trials.The recurrence rates at 10-year follow-up in the ROR and N trials were 20.1% and 19.7%, respectively. Notably, there was nodata available for 10-year follow-up in RCTs.<b>Conclusions:</b> Observation bias seems to significantly impact the results of ROR studies. Implementing a well-structured, all-encompassing patient follow-up at specific time intervals can effectively mitigate this bias, which might otherwise compromise the validity of our findings.<b>Significance of work:</b> The extent of observation bias in ROR studies compared to RCTs and non-RCTs remains unknown. Ourscrutiny of excision and primary open therapy, the largest therapeutic cohort globally, reveals ROR recurrence rates potentiallydeflated by three to fourfold relative to RCTs or non-RCT findings.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Polish Journal of Surgery
Published
2025-03-14
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0055.0465
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Anorectal Disease Treatments and Outcomes
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
6.02
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Unveiling Observation Bias in Pilonidal Sinus Disease Studies: A Comparative Analysis of Study Designs and Follow-Up Protocols

Christina Oetzmann von Sochaczewski, Susanne Haas, Dietrich Doll, Ida Kaad Faurschou et al.
3 citations
Polish Journal of Surgery
Anorectal Disease Treatments and Outcomes
6.02
article

Unveiling Observation Bias in Pilonidal Sinus Disease Studies: A Comparative Analysis of Study Designs and Follow-Up Protocols

Christina Oetzmann von Sochaczewski, Susanne Haas, Dietrich Doll, Ida Kaad Faurschou, Theo Hackmann, Myriam Braun-Muenker
article en
3 citations

Abstract

<b>Introduction:</b> The extent of observation bias in long-term surgical outcomes due to inadequate or unplanned follow-up in pilonidal sinus disease (PSD) studies is unclear. We made a hypothesis on the high risk of underreported recurrence in studies relying on the patients returning in case of recurrent disease (return on recurrence; ROR).<b>Aim:</b> To investigate and quantify the amount of bias associated with regular <i>vs.</i> return-on-recurrence follow-up of patients.<b>Materials and methods:</b> A total of 5.485 retrievable PSD publications were screened for eligibility, yielding 1.222 PSD studies with 135.349 patients treated, published between 1833 and 2023, included for analysis. Of these, 139 were Randomized Controlled Trials (RCT), 54 were ROR trials, and 1,029 were non-RCT non-ROR (N) trials. Recurrence rates were compared between groups<b>Results:</b> The five-year recurrence rates across all treatments in PSD were 18.9% for RCTs, 10.4% for N trials, and 12.4% forROR trials. Recurrence rates in the N and the ROR trials were statistically indistinguishable at ten-year follow-up (p = 0.1),whereas RCTs show significantly higher recurrence rates than N or ROR at 10-year follow-ups (p<0.001, p<0.001). Comparingonly primary open treatment, the five-year recurrence rate was 18.6% for RCT trials, 11.5% for N trials, and 4.1% for ROR trials.The recurrence rates at 10-year follow-up in the ROR and N trials were 20.1% and 19.7%, respectively. Notably, there was nodata available for 10-year follow-up in RCTs.<b>Conclusions:</b> Observation bias seems to significantly impact the results of ROR studies. Implementing a well-structured, all-encompassing patient follow-up at specific time intervals can effectively mitigate this bias, which might otherwise compromise the validity of our findings.<b>Significance of work:</b> The extent of observation bias in ROR studies compared to RCTs and non-RCTs remains unknown. Ourscrutiny of excision and primary open therapy, the largest therapeutic cohort globally, reveals ROR recurrence rates potentiallydeflated by three to fourfold relative to RCTs or non-RCT findings.

Polish Journal of SurgeryVol. 97(4)
University of Vechta (DE), Fulda University of Applied Sciences (DE), University Hospital Bonn (DE), Regional Hospital Randers (DK)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Anorectal Disease Treatments and Outcomes
6.02
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.