ArticleAdvances in orthopedics2023
How Safe and Technical Is Modified Dunn Osteotomy in the Management of Patients with SCFE: A Clinical Trial with Short-Term Follow-Up.
Article in Advances in orthopedics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Does the development of AVN after the modified Dunn procedure for slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE) depend on slip stability? A systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Pooled it
- The Swedish experience of capital realignment surgery for slipped capital femoral epiphysis: results from a nationwide retrospective cohort of 28 patients.Acta orthopaedica · 2026Article
- Immediate Versus Semi-Elective Treatment of Stable Slipped Capital Femoral Epiphyses (SCFE).Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Low Rate of AVN and Complications in Unstable SCFE With Epiphyseal-metaphyseal Discontinuity After Treatment With a Modified Dunn Procedure.Clinical orthopaedics and related research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Over the last decade, modified Dunn osteotomy has been widely used in the management of slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE) with varying degrees of complications. Different conclusions have been adopted. Our study represented our experience in using such a technique in stable and unstable SCFE and tried to determine its safety and applicability for routine practice. Methods: Our study adopted an interventional prospective design performed on 24 hips divided evenly between both sexes with a mean age of 13.25. On the Southwick classification, the cases were distributed between moderate and severe, which constituted 41.7% and 58.33%, respectively. Three quarters of the study subjects were stable according to the Loder classification. Each underwent modified Dunn osteotomy after a safe surgical hip dislocation. Results: Over the period of about 1-year follow-up, clinical evaluation was performed by examining the surgical site and assessing the legs' length, range of hip movement, Harris hip score, and iHOT-12 score. Radiological assessment was performed by calculation of slip angle from the frog lateral view, assessment of union, and occurrence of any complications. The study showed that there was significant improvement in patients in terms of radiological and clinical outcomes, with the occurrence of AVN in 16.7% of cases (4 out of 24). All cases of AVN occurred in unstable hips. Conclusion: Despite the complication of AVN, we believe the results of this study add to the current literature which suggests that modified Dunn osteotomy is an effective and safe technique for the management of moderate and severe SCFE. This trial is registered with PACTR202312819351504.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.