Search

Background: Although femoral retroversion has been linked to the onset of slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE), and may result from a rotation of the femoral epiphysis around the epiphyseal tubercle leading to femoral retroversion, femoral version has rarely been described in patients with SCFE. Furthermore, the prevalence of actual femoral retroversion and the effect of different measurement methods on femoral version angles has yet to be studied in SCFE., Questions/purposes: (1) Do femoral version and the prevalence of femoral retroversion differ between hips with SCFE and the asymptomatic contralateral side? (2) How do the mean femoral version angles and the prevalence of femoral retroversion change depending on the measurement method used? (3) What is the interobserver reliability and intraobserver reproducibility of these measurement methods?, Methods: For this retrospective, controlled, single-center study, we reviewed our institutional database for patients who were treated for unilateral SCFE and who had undergone a pelvic CT scan. During the period in question, the general indication for obtaining a CT scan was to define the surgical strategy based on the assessment of deformity severity in patients with newly diagnosed SCFE or with previous in situ fixation. After applying prespecified inclusion and exclusion criteria, we included 79 patients. The mean age was 15 ± 4 years, 48% (38 of 79) of the patients were male, and 56% (44 of 79) were obese (defined as a BMI > 95th percentile (mean BMI 34 ± 9 kg/m2). One radiology resident (6 years of experience) measured femoral version of the entire study group using five different methods. Femoral neck version was measured as the orientation of the femoral neck. Further measurement methods included the femoral head's center and differed regarding the level of landmarks for the proximal femoral reference axis. From proximal to distal, this included the most-proximal methods (Lee et al. and Reikerås et al.) and most-distal methods (Tomczak et al. and Murphy et al.). Most proximally (Lee et al. method), we used the most cephalic junction of the greater trochanter as the landmark and, most distally, we used the center base of the femoral neck superior to the lesser trochanter (Murphy et al.). The orientation of the distal femoral condyles served as the distal reference axis for all five measurement methods. All five methods were compared side-by-side (involved versus uninvolved hip), and comparisons among all five methods were performed using paired t-tests. The prevalence of femoral retroversion (< 0°) was compared using a chi-square test. A subset of patients was measured twice by the first observer and by a second orthopaedic resident (2 years of experience) to assess intraobserver reproducibility and interobserver reliability; for this assessment, we used intraclass correlation coefficients., Results: The mean femoral neck version was lower in hips with SCFE than in the contralateral side (-2° ± 13° versus 7° ± 11°; p < 0.001). This yielded a mean side-by side difference of -8° ± 11° (95% CI -11° to -6°; p < 0.001) and a higher prevalence of femoral retroversion in hips with SCFE (58% [95% CI 47% to 69%]; p < 0.001) than on the contralateral side (29% [95% CI 19% to 39%]). These differences between hips with SCFE and the contralateral side were higher and ranged from -17° ± 11° (95% CI -20° to -15°; p < 0.001) based on the method of Tomczak et al. to -22° ± 13° (95% CI -25° to -19°; p < 0.001) according to the method of Murphy et al. The mean overall femoral version angles increased for hips with SCFE using more-distal landmarks compared with more-proximal landmarks. The prevalence of femoral retroversion was higher in hips with SCFE for the proximal methods of Lee et al. and Reikerås et al. (91% [95% CI 85% to 97%] and 84% [95% CI 76% to 92%], respectively) than for the distal measurement methods of Tomczak et al. and Murphy et al. (47% [95% CI 36% to 58%] and 60% [95% CI 49% to 71%], respectively [all p < 0.001]). We detected mean differences ranging from -19° to 4° (all p < 0.005) for 8 of 10 pairwise comparisons in hips with SCFE. Among these, the greatest differences were between the most-proximal methods and the more-distal methods, with a mean difference of -19° ± 7° (95% CI -21° to -18°; p < 0.001), comparing the methods of Lee et al. and Tomczak et al. In hips with SCFE, we found excellent agreement (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] > 0.80) for intraobserver reproducibility (reader 1, ICC 0.93 to 0.96) and interobserver reliability (ICC 0.95 to 0.98) for all five measurement methods. Analogously, we found excellent agreement (ICC > 0.80) for intraobserver reproducibility (reader 1, range 0.91 to 0.96) and interobserver reliability (range 0.89 to 0.98) for all five measurement methods in healthy contralateral hips., Conclusion: We showed that femoral neck version is asymmetrically decreased in unilateral SCFE, and that differences increase when including the femoral head's center. Thus, to assess the full extent of an SCFE deformity, femoral version measurements should consider the position of the displaced epiphysis. The prevalence of femoral retroversion was high in patients with SCFE and increased when using proximal anatomic landmarks. Since the range of femoral version angles was wide, femoral version cannot be predicted in a given hip and must be assessed individually. Based on these findings, we believe it is worthwhile to add evaluation of femoral version to the diagnostic workup of children with SCFE. Doing so may better inform surgeons as they contemplate when to use isolated offset correction or to perform an additional femoral osteotomy for SCFE correction based on the severity of the slip and the rotational deformity. To facilitate communication among physicians and for the design of future studies, we recommend consistently reporting the applied measurement technique., Level of Evidence: Level III, prognostic study., Competing Interests: All ICMJE Conflict of Interest Forms for authors and Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® editors and board members are on file with the publication and can be viewed on request., (Copyright © 2020 by the Association of Bone and Joint Surgeons.)

Background: Contemporary studies have described the rotational mechanism in patients with slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE). However, there have been limited patient imaging data and information to quantify the rotation. Determining whether the epiphysis is rotated or translated and measuring the epiphyseal displacement in all planes may facilitate planning for surgical reorientation of the epiphysis., Questions/purposes: (1) How does epiphyseal rotation and translation differ among mild, moderate, and severe SCFE? (2) Is there a correlation between epiphyseal rotation and posterior or inferior translation in hips with SCFE? (3) Does epiphyseal rotation correlate with the size of the epiphyseal tubercle or the metaphyseal fossa or with epiphyseal cupping?, Methods: We identified 51 patients (55% boys [28 of 51]; mean age 13 ± 2 years) with stable SCFE who underwent preoperative CT of the pelvis before definitive treatment. Stable SCFE was selected because unstable SCFE would not allow for accurate assessment of rotation given the complete displacement of the femoral head in relation to the neck. The epiphysis and metaphysis were segmented and reconstructed in three-dimensions (3-D) for analysis in this retrospective study. One observer (a second-year orthopaedic resident) performed the image segmentation and measurements of epiphyseal rotation and translation relative to the metaphysis, epiphyseal tubercle, metaphyseal fossa, and the epiphysis extension onto the metaphysis defined as epiphyseal cupping. To assess the reliability of the measurements, a randomly selected subset of 15 hips was remeasured by the primary examiner and by the two experienced examiners independently. We used ANOVA to calculate the intraclass and interclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) for intraobserver and interobserver reliability of rotational and translational measurements. The ICC values for rotation were 0.91 (intraobserver) and 0.87 (interobserver) and the ICC values for translation were 0.92 (intraobserver) and 0.87 (intraobserver). After adjusting for age and sex, we compared the degree of rotation and translation among mild, moderate, and severe SCFE. Pearson correlation analysis was used to assess the associations between rotation and translation and between rotation and tubercle, fossa, and cupping measurements., Results: Hips with severe SCFE had greater epiphyseal rotation than hips with mild SCFE (adjusted mean difference 21° [95% CI 11° to 31°]; p < 0.001) and hips with moderate SCFE (adjusted mean difference 13° [95% CI 3° to 23°]; p = 0.007). Epiphyseal rotation was positively correlated with posterior translation (r = 0.33 [95% CI 0.06 to 0.55]; p = 0.02) but not with inferior translation (r = 0.16 [95% CI -0.12 to 0.41]; p = 0.27). There was a positive correlation between rotation and metaphyseal fossa depth (r = 0.35 [95% CI 0.08 to 0.57]; p = 0.01), width (r = 0.41 [95% CI 0.15 to 0.61]; p = 0.003), and length (r = 0.56 [95% CI 0.38 to 0.75]; p < 0.001)., Conclusion: This study supports a rotational mechanism for the pathogenesis of SCFE. Increased rotation is associated with more severe slips, posterior epiphyseal translation, and enlargement of the metaphyseal fossa. The rotational nature of the deformity, with the center of rotation at the epiphyseal tubercle, should be considered when planning in situ fixation and realignment surgery. Avoiding placing a screw through the epiphyseal tubercle-the pivot point of rotation- may increase the stability of the epiphysis. The realignment of the epiphysis through rotation rather than simple translation is recommended during the open subcapital realignment procedure. Enlargement of the metaphyseal fossa disrupts the interlocking mechanism with the tubercle and increases epiphyseal instability. Even in the setting of a stable SCFE, an increased fossa enlargement may indicate using two screws instead of one screw, given the severity of epiphyseal rotation and the risk of instability. Further biomechanical studies should investigate the number and position of in situ fixation screws in relation to the epiphyseal tubercle and metaphyseal fossa., Level of Evidence: Level III, prognostic study., Competing Interests: All ICMJE Conflict of Interest Forms for authors and Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® editors and board members are on file with the publication and can be viewed on request. Each author certifies that neither he nor she, nor any member of his or her immediate family, has funding or commercial associations (consultancies, stock ownership, equity interest, patent/licensing arrangements, etc.) that might pose a conflict of interest in connection with the submitted article., (Copyright © 2020 by the Association of Bone and Joint Surgeons.)

Background: Peripheral cupping of the capital femoral epiphysis over the metaphysis has been reported as a precursor of cam morphology, but may also confer stability of the epiphysis protecting it from slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE). The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between a novel morphologic parameter of inherent physeal stability, epiphyseal cupping, and the development of SCFE in a dual-center matched-control cohort study., Methods: We performed a dual-center age-matched and sex-matched cohort study comparing 279 subjects with unilateral SCFE and 279 radiographically normal controls from 2 tertiary children's hospitals. All SCFE patients had at least 18 months of radiographic follow-up for contralateral slip surveillance. Anteroposterior and frog lateral pelvis radiographs were utilized to measure the epiphyseal cupping ratio and the current standard measure of inherent physeal stability, the epiphyseal extension ratio., Results: Control hips were found to have greater epiphyseal cupping than the contralateral uninvolved hip of SCFE subjects both superiorly (0.28±0.08 vs. 0.24±0.06; P<0.001) and anteriorly (0.22±0.07 vs. 0.19±0.06; P<0.001). The 58/279 (21%) subjects who went on to develop contralateral slip had decreased epiphyseal cupping superiorly (0.25±0.07 vs. 0.23±0.05; P=0.03) and anteriorly (0.20±0.06 vs. 0.17±0.04; P<0.001). When we compared controls with hips that did not progress to contralateral slip and hips that further developed a contralateral SCFE, 1-way ANOVA demonstrated a stepwise decrease in epiphyseal cupping and epiphyseal extension ratio in the anterior and superior planes from control hips to contralateral hips without subsequent slip to contralateral hips that developed a SCFE (P<0.01 for each)., Conclusions: This study provides further evidence that epiphyseal cupping around the metaphysis is associated with decreased likelihood of SCFE and may reflect increased inherent physeal stability. Epiphyseal cupping may represent an adaptive mechanism to stabilize the epiphysis during adolescence at the long-term cost of the eventual development of associated cam-femoroacetabular impingement deformity., Levels of Evidence: Level III-prognostic Study.

Background: Prophylactic pinning of the uninvolved side after unilateral slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE) is controversial. The alpha angle, a measurement of femoral head-neck aspherity, was proposed as a predictor of progression of contralateral SCFE with a treatment threshold of greater than 50.5°. The aim of this study was to evaluate its validity in our cohort of patients., Methods: A retrospective review of a 10-year series of patients who presented with unilateral SCFE was conducted. Minimum follow-up duration to identify contralateral progression was 18 months. Age, sex, ethnicity, and endocrinopathies were noted. Alpha angle measurements of the unaffected hip were performed by two independent observers. The average values of measurements were used for analysis. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to identify predictors of contralateral progression. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was generated., Results: There were 43 patients with unilateral SCFE. Seven patients (16.3%) developed contralateral SCFE. There were 31 males (72.1%) and 12 females (27.9%). The mean duration from index surgery to contralateral fixation was 43.9 weeks (range, 16.2 to 77 weeks). The mean alpha angle was significantly higher in the patients with contralateral progression (mean, 50.7°; standard deviation [SD], 5.4°; range, 43.8° to 58.5°) than in the patients without progression (mean, 43.0°; SD, 4.2°; range, 33.0° to 52.5°; p < 0.001). The alpha angle was also identified as a statistically significant predictor of contralateral progression on multivariate analysis ( p = 0.02). The intraclass correlation coefficient for interobserver reliability was moderately strong at 0.76 (95% confidence interval, 0.55 to 0.87). The area under the ROC curve was 0.88. The treatment threshold of 50.5° had a sensitivity of 0.43, specificity of 0.94, and number needed to treat (NNT) of 2.7. The ideal treatment threshold derived from the ROC curve was 49.0°, which had a sensitivity of 0.71, specificity of 0.89, and an NNT of 1.7., Conclusions: Alpha angle is a potential predictor of contralateral hip involvement in children with SCFE who may benefit from prophylactic hip fixation. Results from our series suggest a treatment threshold be 49.0°. However, given the limited sample size and moderately strong interobserver reliability, larger studies are needed to validate our findings., Competing Interests: CONFLICT OF INTEREST: No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported., (Copyright © 2019 by The Korean Orthopaedic Association.)

Purpose: To compare longitudinal growth and cam deformity of the proximal femur after treatment for slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE) with one screw versus two smooth pins., Methods: We studied 43 patients (29 males, 14 females; mean age, 12.1 years; range, 9.5-14 years) with idiopathic unilateral SCFE treated with in situ fixation with one cannulated screw (group A, n = 23) or two smooth pins (group B, n = 20). Anteroposterior and frog-leg radiographs of the pelvis were evaluated for each patient at initial presentation, post-operatively and at physeal closure. Longitudinal growth was evaluated using the femoral neck length (FNL), the caput-collum-diaphyseal (CCD) angle, and the articulo-trochanteric distance (ATD). Cam deformity was assessed using the anterior offset α-angle and the head-neck offset ratio (HNOR). The mean follow-up was 5.1 years (range, 4-7 years)., Results: Postoperatively, the mean CCD angle was 138.3°, the mean α-angle was 66.1° and the mean HNOR was - 0.030. At physeal closure, mean CCD angle significantly decreased to 133.6°, mean α-angle significantly reduced to 52.1°, and mean HNOR significantly improved to + 0.039. CCD, FNL, ATD, α-angle, and HNOR were not different between groups., Conclusions: One screw or two smooth pins result in similar longitudinal growth and deformity of the proximal femur after SCFE. The femoral head-neck junction remarkably improves until physeal closure; however, residual cam deformity is not avoided after in situ pinning. The complication rate with smooth pins is higher.

Background: In situ pinning is the conventional treatment for a stable slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE). However, with a severe stable SCFE the residual deformity may lead to femoroacetabular impingement and articular cartilage damage. A modified Dunn subcapital realignment procedure has been developed to allow for correction at the level of the deformity while preserving the blood supply to the femoral head., Questions/purposes: We compared children with severe stable SCFE treated with the modified Dunn procedure or in situ pinning in terms of (1) proximal femoral radiographic deformity; (2) Heyman and Herndon clinical outcome; (3) complication rate; and (4) number of reoperations performed after the initial procedure., Methods: In this nonmatched retrospective study, 15 patients treated with the modified Dunn procedure (between 2007 and 2012) and 15 treated with in situ pinning (between 2001 and 2009) for severe but stable SCFE were followed for a mean of 2.5 years (range, 1-6 years). During the period in question, the decision regarding which procedure to use was based on the on-call surgeon's discretion; six surgeons performed in situ pinning and three surgeons performed the modified Dunn procedure. A total of 15 other patients were treated for the same diagnosis during the study period but were lost to followup before 1 year; of those, 12 were in the in situ pinning group. Radiographs were reviewed to measure the AP and lateral alpha angles, femoral head-neck offset, and Southwick angle preoperatively and at the latest clinical visit. The Heyman and Herndon clinical outcome, complications, and subsequent hip surgeries were recorded., Results: At latest followup, the median AP alpha angle (52°, range 41°-59° versus 76°, interquartile range [IQR]: 68°-88°; p = 0.0017), median lateral alpha angle (44°, IQR: 40°-51° versus 87°, IQR: 74°-96°; p < 0.001), median head-neck offset (7 mm, IQR: 5-9 mm versus -5, IQR: -11 to -4 mm; p < 0.001), and median Southwick angle (16°, IQR: 6°-23° versus 58°, IQR: 47°-66°; p < 0.001) revealed better deformity correction with the modified Dunn procedure compared with in situ pinning. Nine patients had good or excellent results in the modified Dunn group compared with four of 15 in the in situ pinning group (p = 0.0343; odds ratio, 5.86; 95% CI, 1.13-40.43). With the numbers available, there were no differences in the numbers of complications in each group (five versus three complications in the in situ and modified Dunn groups, respectively; p = 0.66), but there were more reoperations in the in situ pinning group (three versus seven; p = 0.0230)., Conclusions: The modified Dunn procedure results in better morphologic features of the femur, a higher rate of good and excellent Heyman and Herndon clinical outcome, a lower reoperation rate, and a similar occurrence of complications when compared with in situ pinning for treatment of severe stable SCFE., Level of Evidence: Level III, therapeutic study.

Slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE) is a common hip disorder among adolescents, whereby the epiphysis is displaced posteriorly and inferiorly to the metaphysis. Treatment modalities aim to stabilize the epiphysis, prevent further slippage, and avoid complications associated with long-term morbidity, such as osteonecrosis and chondrolysis. Controversy exists with SCFE regarding prophylactic fixation of the contralateral, painless, normal hip, the role of femoroacetabular impingement with SCFE, and whether in situ fixation is the best treatment method for SCFE. This article presents and discusses the latest diagnostic and treatment modalities for SCFE., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: For mild to moderate slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE) in situ fixation is the current treatment standard. However, concerning the implant selection (screw versus k-wires) as well as the prophylactic stabilisation of the non-affected hip, controversies still exist. The aim of this study was to analyse femoral residual growth and femoral deformities after in situ fixation of SCFE either with k-wires or screws., Patients and Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of the radiographs of adolescents treated for SCFE in our department between 01/2003 and 02/2011. To evaluate femoral growth the articulo-trochanteric distance, centro-trochanteric distance, caput-collum-diaphyseal angle, pin-joint ratio and pin-physis ratio were determined. The femoral deformity was assessed by measuring the sphericity of the femoral head. Degenerative changes were evaluated in the final radiographs. Statistical analysis was performed concerning differences between therapeutically and prophylactically treated hips as well as stabilisations with k-wires and screws., Results: A total of 22 patients (female : male = 14 : 8, mean age girls: 11 ± 1 years, boys: 13 ± 2 years) with 26 slipped capital femoral epiphyses was analysed. K-wires were used for fixation in 4 hips each therapeutically and prophylactically, 22 hips with SCFE and 14 non-affected hips were stabilised with screws. Treatment with screws did not lead to significantly earlier physeal closure than k-wire pinning. Regarding the femoral growth parameters a significant decrease in the articulo-trochanteric distance and CCD angle was detectable in all groups. The pin-joint ratio revealed an adequate residual growth in 58 % of the therapeutically and in 72 % of the prophylactically treated hips without significant difference between k-wires and screws. The pin-physis ratio demonstrated similar values. Regarding the femoral deformity the SCFE hips resulted in a significantly reduced sphericity, which remained unchanged during follow-up. The prophylactic stabilisation did not result in any deterioration of sphericity., Conclusion: The results of this study imply that further growth of the proximal femur after insertion of a sliding screw for in situ stabilisation of mild to moderate slipped capital femoral epiphysis does occur. Furthermore, an increase of deformity during follow-up through screw fixation as compared to pinning was not noticed. Hence, the assumption that screw fixation leads to permanent physeal impairment cannot be confirmed. The consideration of these results may be helpful for implant selection as well as indicating prophylactic surgery for non-affected hips., (Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.)

Background: Patients with slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE) may develop cam-type femoroacetabular impingement (FAI). Early management of FAI has been advocated for patients with symptomatic FAI. The various treatment options, including reorientation surgeries, realignment procedures, and osteoplasty, remain controversial., Questions/purposes: We asked whether an intertrochanteric flexion osteotomy improved the clinical symptoms of FAI in patients with SCFE and confirmed whether the radiographic signs were compatible with the clinical signs of FAI., Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 32 symptomatic patients who underwent 32 intertrochanteric flexion osteotomies for severe SCFE. FAI was diagnosed clinically with a positive impingement sign. The osteotomies were designed preoperatively using CT. Cam-type FAI was evaluated with the modified α angle (β angle) on a Lauenstein view, measured between the proximal femoral shaft axis and the line from the center of the femoral head to the anterior point where the distance of the head center exceeded the femoral head radius. The minimum followup was 2 years (mean, 5 years; range, 2-9 years)., Results: At last followup, only two patients complained of pain or inconvenience in daily life; the impingement sign was negative in 24 hips (75%). The β angles at last followup were reduced on average by 39°. The postoperative β angle was higher in hips with positive clinical signs of FAI than in those with negative signs., Conclusions: Intertrochanteric flexion osteotomy for SCFE improved the clinical and radiographic signs of FAI. The β angle and clinical findings showed compatible improvement. We believe our intertrochanteric flexion osteotomy is a viable option for treating severe SCFE., Level of Evidence: Level IV, therapeutic study. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.