Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35633749›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of orthopedics2022

Prophylactic fixation of the unaffected contralateral side in children with slipped capital femoral epiphysis seems favorable: A systematic review.

Steven J C Vink, Renée A van Stralen, Sophie Moerman, Christiaan J A van Bergen

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of orthopedics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Steven J C VinkDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam 3015GD, Netherlands. s.j.c.vink@erasmusmc.nl.
Renée A van StralenDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam 3015GD, Netherlands.
Sophie MoermanDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen 9713GZ, Netherlands.
Christiaan J A van BergenDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Amphia Hospital, Breda 4818CK, Netherlands.
Erasmus MC · NLAmphia Ziekenhuis · NLUniversity Medical Center Groningen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSlipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE) occurs in adolescents and has an incidence of around 10

aimTo investigate the risk rate of contralateral SCFE and assess the (dis)advantages of prophylactic fixation of the contralateral hip.

methodsA systematic literature search was performed in the Embase, Medline, Web of Science Core Collection and Cochrane databases. Search terms included 'slipped capital femoral epiphysis,' 'fixation,' 'contralateral,' and derivatives. The eligibility of the acquired articles was independently assessed by the authors and additional relevant articles were included through cross-referencing. Publications were considered eligible for inclusion if they presented data about otherwise healthy children with primarily unilateral SCFE and the outcomes of prophylactically pinning their unaffected side, or about the rates of contralateral slips and complications thereof. The study quality of the included articles was assessed independently by the authors by means of the methodological index for non-randomized studies criteria.

resultsOf 293 identified unique publications, we included 26 studies with a total of 12897 patients. 1762 patients (14%) developed a subsequent symptomatic contralateral slip. In addition, 38% of patients developed a subsequent slip on the contralateral side without experiencing clinical symptoms. The most outspoken advantage of prophylactic fixation of the contralateral hip in the literature is prevention of an (asymptomatic) slip, thus reducing the increased risk of avascular necrosis (AVN), cam morphology and osteoarthritis. Disadvantages include an increased risk of infection, AVN, peri-implant fractures, loss of fixation as well as migration of hardware and morphologic changes as a consequence of growth guidance. These risks, however, appeared to only occur incidentally and were usually mild compared to the risks involved with an actual SCFE.

conclusionThe advantages of prophylactic pinning of the unaffected side in otherwise healthy patients with unilateral SCFE seem to outweigh the disadvantages. The final decision for treatment remains to be patient-tailored.

Indexed as

Postoperative complicationsPrimary preventionRadiographyRisk factorsSlipped capital femoral epiphysis

Identifiers

PMID35633749
PMCPMC9124999
OpenAlexW4280616723

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.