ArticleIndian journal of orthopaedics2024
Does Prophylactic Pinning Affect the Proximal Femur Morphology in Slipped Capital Femoral Epiphysis?
Article in Indian journal of orthopaedics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Fix it or risk it? Revisiting contralateral hip prophylactic fixation in unilateral slipped capital femoral epiphysis: an updated review of the past decade's literature.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The role of prophylactic pinning of the contralateral hip in unilateral SCFE is well established in patients with risk factors for developing contralateral slip. The effect of prophylactic pinning on the growth and morphology of the hip is not well documented in the literature. We aimed to study the effect of prophylactic pinning on the residual growth and morphology of the proximal femur. Materials & Methods: The institutional database was searched for all unilateral SCFE cases for the period 2011 to 2020. A total of 171 unilateral SCFE cases were identified. All the radiographs were scanned and those patients who had follow-up X-rays till skeletal maturity were included in the study. Prophylactic pinning was performed using 6.5 mm fully threaded cancellous screws in supine position on a radiolucent table. The following radiological parameters were measured on the post-operative X-rays and at skeletal maturity: (i) neck length (NL), (ii) neck-shaft angle (NSA), (iii) femoral offset (FO), (iv) articulo-trochanteric distance (ATD) and (iv) tip-apex distance (TAD) by two different observers. Results: The mean age of the cohort was 13.7 years. ATD decreased from the mean value of 25.67 mm in post-operative radiographs to 20.84 mm in final follow-up radiographs. The NL, FO, and TAD were found to be increasing with age with mean final follow-up values of 55.35 mm, 41.41 mm, and 6.19 mm respectively compared to post-operative mean values of 50.95 mm, 37.4 mm, and 4.69 mm. There was no significant change in the neck-shaft angle. The mean post-operative NSA was 132.9° and it was 131.8° at final follow-up radiographs. Conclusion: Prophylactic pinning in unilateral SCFE does not stop the growth of the proximal femur completely. The ATD decreases in all the patients with prophylactic screw fixation probably due to the discrepancy in growth between the trochanteric apophysis and proximal femoral physis. The clinical effects of this subtle change in the morphology of the proximal femur need further investigation. Level of Evidence: Level IV Case series.
Indexed as
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.