Safely Reducing the Incidence of Contralateral Slipped Capital Femoral Epiphysis: Results of a Prospectively Implemented Prophylactic Fixation Protocol Using the Posterior Sloping Angle

Surgeon Preference for Prophylactic Contralateral Fixation in Slipped Capital Femoral Epiphysis (SCFE) Patients: A Nationwide POSNA Survey Study

BACKGROUND

It is estimated that 11% to 60% of unilateral slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE) patients will develop contralateral pathology, usually within 18 months after the first event. Despite this, prophylactic fixation remains controversial, and there is significant variability in surgeon preferences. Thus, this study aimed to determine which factors predict surgeon preferences for prophylactic contralateral pinning in SCFE patients.

METHODS

We designed a survey for pediatric orthopedic surgeons to collect data on (1) surgeon and hospital characteristics, (2) individual preference for contralateral SCFE pinning in three disparate hypothetical scenarios, and (3) personal risk-aversion traits. The questionnaire was distributed across the United States by the POSNA Evidence-Based Orthopaedics Committee. All POSNA members were eligible to respond. We performed analyses to evaluate the role of patient risk factors in hypothetical surgical decision-making and to determine if surgical training, hospital characteristics, and geographic region influenced prophylactic pinning in a surgeon's real-life practice.

RESULTS

A total of 126 POSNA members responded to the survey. In the last year, a median of 6.5 SCFE patients was seen per surgeon (1243 patients total). A median of 10% of those patients underwent prophylactic contralateral fixation. In multiple analyses, surgeons were influenced by body mass index, open triradiate cartilage, patient race, various endocrine abnormalities, and specific radiographic measurements when deciding to fix the contralateral side prophylactically. Moreover, in multivariate regression, more years in practice and a hospital size of 500+ beds predicted fewer prophylactic fixation procedures (all P <0.05). Surgeons practicing in the South Atlantic, New England, and Mountain regions of the United States estimated the highest rate of contralateral pinning.

CONCLUSIONS

This study's findings suggest that multiple factors influence surgeons' decisions to prophylactically fix the contralateral side in SCFE patients. Surgical training, hospital characteristics, and geographical regions played a role in decision-making.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

N/A.

Socioeconomic Deprivation and its Associations With Follow-up Compliance After In Situ Pinning of Slipped Capital Femoral Epiphysis

BACKGROUND

Slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE) is a common cause of hip pain in adolescents and is most often treated by in situ screw fixation. Orthopaedic follow-up is critical after treatment for SCFE due to risks of complications and subsequent contralateral slip. Recent studies have shown that socioeconomic deprivation is associated with decreased fracture care compliance, but no studies have explored this relationship with SCFEs. The study aims to determine the relationship between socioeconomic deprivation and SCFE follow-up care compliance.

METHODS

This study included pediatric patients treated with in situ pinning of SCFE between 2011 and 2019 at a single tertiary-care urban children's hospital. Demographic and clinical information were obtained from electronic medical records. The Area Deprivation Index (ADI) was used to quantify the socioeconomic deprivation of each. Outcome variables included patient age and status of physeal closure at the most recent appointment, in addition to the length of follow-up (mo). Statistical relationships were evaluated using nonparametric bivariate analysis and correlation.

RESULTS

We identified 247 evaluable patients; 57.1% were male, and the median age was 12.4 years. Most slips were stable (95.1%) and treated with isolated unilateral pinning (55.9%). Median length of follow-up was 11.9 months (interquartile range, 4.95 to 23.1) with median patient age at final visit of 13.6 years (interquartile range, 12.4 to 15.1). Only 37.2% of patients were followed until physeal closure. The mean ADI spread in this sample was similar to the national distribution. However, patients in the most deprived quartile were lost to follow-up significantly earlier (median, 6.5 mo) than those in the least deprived quartile (median, 12.5 mo; P <0.001). Throughout the entire cohort, there was a significant, inverse relationship between deprivation and follow-up length ( rs (238) = -0.3; P <0.001), with this relationship most pronounced in the most deprived quartile.

CONCLUSIONS

In this sample, ADI spread was representative of national trends, and the incidence of SCFE was distributed evenly across deprivation quartiles. However, follow-up length does not mirror this relationship; increased socioeconomic deprivation is associated with an earlier loss to follow-up (often well before physeal closure).

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II-retrospective prognostic study.