Intracapsular cuneiform osteotomy compared with in-situ pinning for the management of slipped capital femoral epiphysis.

Abstract

Intracapsular cuneiform osteotomy was initially introduced to restore the morphology of the proximal femur after slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE). However, whether this procedure results in a higher risk of avascular necrosis (AVN) or lower incidence of cam deformity than in-situ pinning is unclear. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of intracapsular cuneiform osteotomy and in-situ pinning to treat SCFE in children. Twenty-three children who suffered from SCFE underwent either intracapsular cuneiform osteotomy (eight patients, eight hips) or in-situ pinning (15 patients, 18 hips) between 2006 and 2014. No patient was lost to follow-up at a mean of 4.5 years. In the osteotomy group, the Japanese Orthopedic Association's hip score system score increased from 50.5 (20-89) to 98.9 (95-100) and from 65.9 (48-90) to 99.0 (44-100) in the in-situ pinning group. On the basis of the slip angle, α angle, and epiphyseal-metaphyseal offset, intracapsular cuneiform osteotomy showed a significantly better result in restoring the morphology of the proximal femur than in-situ pinning (P<0.001). The incidences of AVN, chondrolysis, and lower limb discrepancy were similar between the two groups. On the basis of clinical outcomes, both intracapsular cuneiform osteotomy and in-situ pinning had acceptable abilities to treat SCFE. The incidence of AVN was not related to which technique was used. Osteotomy significantly restored the morphology of the proximal femur.