Literature DB >> 30135982

Moderate and severe SCFE (Slipped Capital Femoral Epiphysis) arthroscopic osteoplasty vs open neck osteotomy-a retrospective analysis of results.

Balasubramanian Balakumar1, Elinor Flatt2, Sanjeev Madan3.   

Abstract

AIM: We intend to compare the outcomes of arthroscopic osteoplasty with open neck osteotomy for correction of the hip impingement and improvement of hip function in children with moderate to severe healed Slipped Capital Femoral Epiphysis (SCFE). Our aim is to verify if arthroscopic osteoplasty could achieve the same outcome as open procedures. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the hospital hip database retrieved 187 cases of SCFE from 2006 to 2013. We found 12 patients underwent open neck osteotomy and deformity correction for moderate/ severe healed SCFE and ten underwent arthroscopic osteoplasty of the hip. We compared the outcomes between these groups.
RESULTS: In the arthroscopy cohort, the mean age at surgery was 15.8 years (range 13-19 years) and mean follow-up was 46.1 months (range 33-66 months). In the neck osteotomy group, the mean age at surgery was 14.6 years (11-20 years) and mean duration of follow-up was 49 months (36-60 months). The outcomes in arthroscopic osteoplasty group vs. open neck osteotomy were as follows: antero-posterior (AP) slip angle 9.2° (0.3°- 28.8°) vs 10.8° (1°-17.9°) (p = 0.0003), lateral slip angle 44.8° (36.5°-64.2°) vs 13.5° (1°-28.5°) (p = 0.00001), oblique plane deformity 47.1° (40.2°-53.5°) vs 16.7° (1°-28.6°) (p = 0.0003), alpha angle 61.88° (52.1°-123°) vs.34.6° (23.2°-45.6°) (p = 0.0003), anterior offset 0 mm (0 mm-2 mm) vs. 5 mm (2-13 mm) (p = 0.0003), modified Harris hip score (MHHS) 75.5 (58.75-96.8) vs. 90 (86.2-99) (p = 0.003), non-arthroplasty hip score (NAHS) 67.12 (18.75-100) vs. 92.1 (81.25-100) (p = 0.002), internal rotation 20° (0-20°) vs. 50° (30°-70°) (p = 0.0002), respectively.
CONCLUSION: Even though the radiographic correction lagged behind in the arthroscopic group, the functional outcomes achieved did convey the gain of function in this cohort. In carefully selected cases, arthroscopy could be a less invasive procedure which has desirable outcomes.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Arthroscopic osteoplasty; Open neck osteotomy; Slipped capital femoral epiphysis

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30135982     DOI: 10.1007/s00264-018-4069-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Orthop        ISSN: 0341-2695            Impact factor:   3.075


  12 in total

1.  Surgical correction of "cam-type" femoroacetabular impingement: a cadaveric comparison of open versus arthroscopic debridement.

Authors:  Rodrigo Mardones; Joaquin Lara; Agustin Donndorff; Sunni Barnes; Michael J Stuart; James Glick; Robert Trousdale
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2008-11-01       Impact factor: 4.772

2.  Childhood obesity and slipped capital femoral epiphysis.

Authors:  Sabrina Compton
Journal:  Radiol Technol       Date:  2014 Jan-Feb

3.  Current Practice in the Management of Slipped Capital Femoral Epiphysis.

Authors:  Dinesh P Thawrani; David S Feldman; Debra A Sala
Journal:  J Pediatr Orthop       Date:  2016 Apr-May       Impact factor: 2.324

Review 4.  Current concepts in management of slipped capital femoral epiphysis.

Authors:  Bernd Bittersohl; Harish S Hosalkar; Christoph Zilkens; Rüdiger Krauspe
Journal:  Hip Int       Date:  2014-10-19       Impact factor: 2.135

5.  Late correction of neck deformity in healed severe slipped capital femoral epiphysis: short-term clinical outcomes.

Authors:  Balasubramanian Balakumar; Sanjeev Madan
Journal:  Hip Int       Date:  2016-05-26       Impact factor: 2.135

Review 6.  Open surgical dislocation versus arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement: a comparison of clinical outcomes.

Authors:  Itamar B Botser; Thomas W Smith; Rima Nasser; Benjamin G Domb
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 4.772

7.  Arthroscopic treatment of femoroacetabular impingement following slipped capital femoral epiphysis.

Authors:  S Z Basheer; A P Cooper; R Maheshwari; B Balakumar; S Madan
Journal:  Bone Joint J       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 5.082

Review 8.  The use of hip arthroscopy in the management of the pediatric hip.

Authors:  Dennis R Roy
Journal:  J Hip Preserv Surg       Date:  2015-12-10

9.  Surgical treatment of femoroacetabular impingement following slipped capital femoral epiphysis: A systematic review.

Authors:  K O Oduwole; D de Sa; J Kay; F Findakli; A Duong; N Simunovic; Y Yi-Meng; O R Ayeni
Journal:  Bone Joint Res       Date:  2017-08-08       Impact factor: 5.853

10.  Cam deformity and hip degeneration are common after fixation of a slipped capital femoral epiphysis.

Authors:  Jakob Klit; Kasper Gosvig; Erland Magnussen; John Gelineck; Thomas Kallemose; Kjeld Søballe; Anders Troelsen
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2014-09-01       Impact factor: 3.717

View more
  3 in total

1.  CORR Insights®: Does a History of Slipped Capital Femoral Epiphysis in Patients Undergoing Femoroacetabular Osteoplasty for Femoroacetabular Impingement Affect Outcomes Scores or Risk of Reoperation?

Authors:  Rachel M Thompson
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2021-05-01       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  How Common Is Femoral Retroversion and How Is it Affected by Different Measurement Methods in Unilateral Slipped Capital Femoral Epiphysis?

Authors:  Florian Schmaranzer; Jennifer R Kallini; Mariana G Ferrer; Patricia E Miller; James D Wylie; Young-Jo Kim; Eduardo N Novais
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2021-05-01       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 3.  Surgical treatment of symptomatic post-slipped capital femoral epiphysis deformity: a comparative study between hip arthroscopy and surgical hip dislocation with or without intertrochanteric osteotomy.

Authors:  James D Wylie; Michael P McClincy; Nishant Uppal; Patricia E Miller; Young-Jo Kim; Michael B Millis; Yi-Meng Yen; Eduardo N Novais
Journal:  J Child Orthop       Date:  2020-04-01       Impact factor: 1.548

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.