CARBUNCLE MANAGEMENT: A PILOT CONTROLLED TRIAL COMPARING SKIN-SPARING SAUCERIZATION FOLLOWED BY DELAYED PRIMARY CLOSURE VERSUS TRADITIONAL SAUCERIZATION wanisya92@gmail.com

295-06

CARBUNCLE MANAGEMENT: A PILOT CONTROLLED TRIAL COMPARING SKIN-SPARING SAUCERIZATION FOLLOWED BY DELAYED PRIMARY CLOSURE VERSUS TRADITIONAL SAUCERIZATION

4

 

 

 

 

Malaysia

Oral or Poster

Carbuncles are deep infections of the subcutaneous often requiring surgical intervention. The traditional approach, saucerization presents several limitations such as delayed wound healing, extended hospital stays and heightened risks of antibiotic resistance. This study evaluates a skin-sparing saucerization technique followed by delay primary closure demonstrated improved outcomes in wound healing and overall patient recovery.

A pilot-controlled trial was conducted involving patients with carbuncles, involve two groups: traditional saucerization and skin-sparing saucerization. Outcome measures included wound healing duration, hospital stay and complications. Clinical parameters including age, sex, comorbidities (DM, HTN), wound size, anatomical location, healing duration, and hospital stay were recorded. Statistical analyses including independent t-tests and Pearson correlation were used to compare healing outcomes and identify significant predictors.

Patients in the skin-sparing group had significantly shorter healing durations (29 ± 14 days vs. 92 ± 77 days, p < 0.001) and shorter hospital stays (1.7 ± 0.7 vs. 3.3 ± 0.5 days, p < 0.001) compared to the traditional group. The incidence of complications was lower in the skin-sparing group, despite having a slightly larger average wound size (5.6 ± 1.7 cm vs. 4.7 ± 2.0 cm). No statistically significant difference in the distribution of diabetes or hypertension was observed between groups.

This alternative new approach show non inferiority, reduces hospital stay, enhances wound healing and allows for an earlier return to daily activities, ultimately improving patient quality of life. Further studies with larger sample sizes are necessary to establish standardized protocols and confirm the broader efficacy of this method.