Evren Akpinar, Ahmet Sevencan, Osman Nuri Ozyalvac, Murat Onder, Muhammed Bilal Kurk, Yakup Alpay, Ilhan Avni Bayhan
{"title":"单侧SCFE患者预防性髋部固定哪个因素更可靠?","authors":"Evren Akpinar, Ahmet Sevencan, Osman Nuri Ozyalvac, Murat Onder, Muhammed Bilal Kurk, Yakup Alpay, 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":"{\"title\":\"Which factor is more reliable considering prophylactic pinning of contralateral hip of unilateral SCFE patients?\",\"authors\":\"Evren Akpinar, Ahmet Sevencan, Osman Nuri Ozyalvac, Murat Onder, Muhammed Bilal Kurk, Yakup Alpay, 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}","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}
Which factor is more reliable considering prophylactic pinning of contralateral hip of unilateral SCFE patients?
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.
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.