Which factor is more reliable considering prophylactic pinning of contralateral hip of unilateral SCFE patients?

Evren Akpinar, Ahmet Sevencan, Osman Nuri Ozyalvac, Murat Onder, Muhammed Bilal Kurk, Yakup Alpay, Ilhan Avni Bayhan
{"title":"Which factor is more reliable considering prophylactic pinning of contralateral hip of unilateral SCFE patients?","authors":"Evren Akpinar,&nbsp;Ahmet Sevencan,&nbsp;Osman Nuri Ozyalvac,&nbsp;Murat Onder,&nbsp;Muhammed Bilal Kurk,&nbsp;Yakup Alpay,&nbsp;Ilhan Avni Bayhan","doi":"10.14744/tjtes.2023.91038","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study evaluates the radiological parameters of developing subsequent contralateral slips in unilateral slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE) patients at the time of initial presentation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study group included the review of unilateral SCFE patients treated between June 2007 and August 2018. Age, gen-der, side, stability, posterior slope angle, grade of slip, modified Oxford bone age score (mOBAS), the Risser classification, and the ap-pearance of the triradiate cartilage were evaluated retrospectively. Data were analyzed between two groups: subsequent contralateral SCFE (SCFESC) patients that developed contralateral slip during follow-up and unilateral SCFE (SCFEU) patients that did not develop contralateral slip up to skeletal maturity. Descriptive statistics were used to compare risk factors between groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This study included 48 patients and 6 patients (12.5%) developed a SCFESC. Only mOBAS was significantly different be-tween groups. The mOBAS scores in SCFESC were 18 in 2 patients (33.3%), 19 in 4 patients (66.7%). The mOBAS scores in SCFEU were 18 in 1 patient (2.4%), 19 in 24 patients (57.1%), and >20 in 17 patients (40.5%). In the SCFESC group, all patients had a Risser score of 0 and all had open triradiate cartilage.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Patients with unilateral SCFE are at risk for SCFESC, and the mOBAS is the best predictor of risk assessment. We agree that mOBAS score of 16,17 or 18 patients' contralateral hips can be prophylactically pinned. We also suggest pinning or close screening of mOBAS 19 patients that some carry relatively high risk of subsequent contralateral slip.</p>","PeriodicalId":49398,"journal":{"name":"Ulusal Travma Ve Acil Cerrahi Dergisi-Turkish Journal of Trauma & Emergency Surgery","volume":"29 7","pages":"818-823"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/a1/d5/TJTES-29-818.PMC10405030.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ulusal Travma Ve Acil Cerrahi Dergisi-Turkish Journal of Trauma & Emergency Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14744/tjtes.2023.91038","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: This study evaluates the radiological parameters of developing subsequent contralateral slips in unilateral slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE) patients at the time of initial presentation.

Methods: The study group included the review of unilateral SCFE patients treated between June 2007 and August 2018. Age, gen-der, side, stability, posterior slope angle, grade of slip, modified Oxford bone age score (mOBAS), the Risser classification, and the ap-pearance of the triradiate cartilage were evaluated retrospectively. Data were analyzed between two groups: subsequent contralateral SCFE (SCFESC) patients that developed contralateral slip during follow-up and unilateral SCFE (SCFEU) patients that did not develop contralateral slip up to skeletal maturity. Descriptive statistics were used to compare risk factors between groups.

Results: This study included 48 patients and 6 patients (12.5%) developed a SCFESC. Only mOBAS was significantly different be-tween groups. The mOBAS scores in SCFESC were 18 in 2 patients (33.3%), 19 in 4 patients (66.7%). The mOBAS scores in SCFEU were 18 in 1 patient (2.4%), 19 in 24 patients (57.1%), and >20 in 17 patients (40.5%). In the SCFESC group, all patients had a Risser score of 0 and all had open triradiate cartilage.

Conclusion: Patients with unilateral SCFE are at risk for SCFESC, and the mOBAS is the best predictor of risk assessment. We agree that mOBAS score of 16,17 or 18 patients' contralateral hips can be prophylactically pinned. We also suggest pinning or close screening of mOBAS 19 patients that some carry relatively high risk of subsequent contralateral slip.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
单侧SCFE患者预防性髋部固定哪个因素更可靠?
背景:本研究评估单侧股骨头骨骺滑动(SCFE)患者在最初表现时发生后续对侧滑动的放射学参数。方法:研究组纳入了2007年6月至2018年8月期间治疗的单侧SCFE患者。回顾性评价患者的年龄、性别、侧位、稳定性、后斜角、滑移程度、改良牛津骨龄评分(mOBAS)、Risser分级及三放射软骨外观。对两组数据进行分析:在随访期间发生对侧滑动的对侧SCFE (SCFESC)患者和在骨骼成熟前未发生对侧滑动的单侧SCFE (SCFEU)患者。描述性统计用于组间危险因素的比较。结果:本研究纳入48例患者,其中6例(12.5%)发生SCFESC。两组间仅mOBAS有显著差异。SCFESC患者的mOBAS评分为2例18分(33.3%),4例19分(66.7%)。SCFEU患者的mOBAS评分为1例18分(2.4%),24例19分(57.1%),>20分17例(40.5%)。在SCFESC组中,所有患者的Risser评分均为0,且均为开放的三辐状软骨。结论:单侧SCFE患者存在发生SCFESC的风险,mOBAS是风险评估的最佳预测指标。我们同意mOBAS评分为16,17或18的患者对侧髋关节可以预防性固定。我们还建议对一些对侧滑动风险相对较高的mOBAS 19患者进行钉住或密切筛查。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
18.20%
发文量
82
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Turkish Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery (TJTES) is an official publication of the Turkish Association of Trauma and Emergency Surgery. It is a double-blind and peer-reviewed periodical that considers for publication clinical and experimental studies, case reports, technical contributions, and letters to the editor. Scope of the journal covers the trauma and emergency surgery. Each submission will be reviewed by at least two external, independent peer reviewers who are experts in their fields in order to ensure an unbiased evaluation process. The editorial board will invite an external and independent reviewer to manage the evaluation processes of manuscripts submitted by editors or by the editorial board members of the journal. The Editor in Chief is the final authority in the decision-making process for all submissions.
期刊最新文献
Selection for antimicrobial prophylaxis in emergency and elective transurethral procedures: Susceptibility pattern in Türkiye. The comparison of the suture materials on intestinal anastomotic healing: an experimental study. Research of Importance of Thiol, CRP and Lactate in Diagnosing Mesenteric Ischemia At An Early Stage: Animal Model. Trauma in pregnancy: An analysis of the adverse perinatal outcomes and the injury severity score. Is diagnostic laparoscopy necessary in the management of left thoracoabdominal stab wounds?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1