What are the considerations for choosing between the Hanley and Modified Hanley procedures for a patient requiring surgical intervention, taking into account their medical history, current health status, and specific condition being treated?

Medical Advisory BoardAll articles are reviewed for accuracy by our Medical Advisory Board
Educational purpose only • Exercise caution as content is pending human review
Article Review Status
Submitted
Under Review
Approved

Last updated: January 22, 2026View editorial policy

Personalize

Help us tailor your experience

Which best describes you? Your choice helps us use language that's most understandable for you.

Modified Hanley vs Hanley Procedure: Evidence-Based Comparison

I cannot provide a definitive recommendation between the Modified Hanley and Hanley procedures because none of the provided evidence addresses these specific surgical techniques for pilonidal disease management. The evidence provided primarily covers unrelated topics including hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, pneumothorax, vascular surgery, and urinary retention—none of which are relevant to pilonidal sinus treatment.

What the Evidence Does NOT Support

The provided guidelines and research do not contain:

  • Any mention of the Hanley procedure (open technique with marsupialization)
  • Any mention of the Modified Hanley procedure (off-midline closure variant)
  • Comparative outcomes data for pilonidal disease surgical approaches
  • Recurrence rates, healing times, or complication profiles for these specific techniques
  • Patient selection criteria for pilonidal sinus surgery

Clinical Context Requiring Different Evidence

For pilonidal disease surgical decision-making, you would need evidence addressing:

  • Recurrence rates comparing midline vs off-midline closure techniques
  • Healing time differences between open (Hanley) and closed (Modified Hanley) approaches
  • Wound complication rates specific to pilonidal surgery
  • Impact of surgical technique on return to work and quality of life
  • Patient factors (BMI, hair density, occupation) that favor one approach over another

General Surgical Principles from Provided Evidence

While not specific to pilonidal disease, the evidence does support general surgical decision-making principles:

  • Minimally invasive approaches reduce morbidity when technically feasible, with lower tissue trauma and faster recovery 1
  • Surgeon experience and center volume significantly impact outcomes across surgical specialties 1
  • Patient comorbidities and frailty should influence procedural selection, with less invasive options preferred for high-risk patients 1

To answer your question properly, you need pilonidal disease-specific guidelines or comparative studies of these exact procedures, which are not present in the provided evidence.

References

Guideline

Guideline Directed Topic Overview

Dr.Oracle Medical Advisory Board & Editors, 2025

Professional Medical Disclaimer

This information is intended for healthcare professionals. Any medical decision-making should rely on clinical judgment and independently verified information. The content provided herein does not replace professional discretion and should be considered supplementary to established clinical guidelines. Healthcare providers should verify all information against primary literature and current practice standards before application in patient care. Dr.Oracle assumes no liability for clinical decisions based on this content.

Have a follow-up question?

Our Medical A.I. is used by practicing medical doctors at top research institutions around the world. Ask any follow up question and get world-class guideline-backed answers instantly.