PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of angular deformity correction by hemiepiphyseal stapling versus percutaneous hemiepiphysiodesis using transphyseal screw in growing children. METHODS: Forty-three physes in 19 patients underwent hemiepiphyseal stapling, and 37 physes in 23 patients underwent percutaneous transphyseal screw placement. All cases were followed up to skeletal maturity or for more than 1 year after hardware removal. Amounts and rates of angular deformity correction, physeal behaviors after hardware removal, and postoperative courses were compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS: The goal of angular correction was achieved in all except 2 patients, who reached skeletal maturity precociously. The mean rates of angular correction were not significantly different between the 2 groups, in both distal femur and proximal tibia. Hardware was removed before skeletal maturity from 56 physes. Angular change remained within 3 degrees for 43 physes (76.8%) at more than 1 year postoperatively, and the rebound phenomenon was observed in 12 (21.4%). No significant difference was observed between the 2 groups in terms of physeal behavior after hardware removal. Patients in the screw group were administered less postoperative pain medication, had shorter hospital stays, and smaller operation scars. In the stapling group, 1 case was complicated due to an extruded staple, and another case experienced premature physeal arrest at 1.5 years postoperatively. One case in the screw group experienced correction failure, probably because of a technical error during screw placement. CONCLUSIONS: Hemiepiphysiodesis using percutaneous transphyseal screw is as effective as hemiepiphyseal stapling in terms of angular deformity correction. Furthermore, hemiepiphysiodesis using transphyseal screw has the advantage of being a minimally invasive procedure, and in this series, did not cause permanent physeal arrest. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of angular deformity correction by hemiepiphyseal stapling versus percutaneous hemiepiphysiodesis using transphyseal screw in growing children. METHODS: Forty-three physes in 19 patients underwent hemiepiphyseal stapling, and 37 physes in 23 patients underwent percutaneous transphyseal screw placement. All cases were followed up to skeletal maturity or for more than 1 year after hardware removal. Amounts and rates of angular deformity correction, physeal behaviors after hardware removal, and postoperative courses were compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS: The goal of angular correction was achieved in all except 2 patients, who reached skeletal maturity precociously. The mean rates of angular correction were not significantly different between the 2 groups, in both distal femur and proximal tibia. Hardware was removed before skeletal maturity from 56 physes. Angular change remained within 3 degrees for 43 physes (76.8%) at more than 1 year postoperatively, and the rebound phenomenon was observed in 12 (21.4%). No significant difference was observed between the 2 groups in terms of physeal behavior after hardware removal. Patients in the screw group were administered less postoperative pain medication, had shorter hospital stays, and smaller operation scars. In the stapling group, 1 case was complicated due to an extruded staple, and another case experienced premature physeal arrest at 1.5 years postoperatively. One case in the screw group experienced correction failure, probably because of a technical error during screw placement. CONCLUSIONS: Hemiepiphysiodesis using percutaneous transphyseal screw is as effective as hemiepiphyseal stapling in terms of angular deformity correction. Furthermore, hemiepiphysiodesis using transphyseal screw has the advantage of being a minimally invasive procedure, and in this series, did not cause permanent physeal arrest. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.
Authors: Ki Hyuk Sung; Chin Youb Chung; Kyoung Min Lee; Seung Yeol Lee; In Ho Choi; Tae-Joon Cho; Won Joon Yoo; Moon Seok Park Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2014-09-03 Impact factor: 3.411