Search

Background: Severe slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE) leads to femoroacetabular impingement and restricted hip motion. We investigated the improvement of impingement-free flexion and internal rotation (IR) in 90 degrees of flexion following a simulated osteochondroplasty, a derotation osteotomy, and a combined flexion-derotation osteotomy in severe SCFE patients using 3D-CT-based collision detection software., Methods: Preoperative pelvic CT of 18 untreated patients (21 hips) with severe SCFE (slip-angle>60 degrees) was used to generate patient-specific 3D models. The contralateral hips of the 15 patients with unilateral SCFE served as the control group. There were 14 male hips (mean age 13±2 y). No treatment was performed before CT. Specific collision detection software was used for the calculation of impingement-free flexion and IR in 90 degrees of flexion and simulation of osteochondroplasty, derotation osteotomy, and combined flexion-derotation osteotomy., Results: Osteochondroplasty alone improved impingement-free motion but compared with the uninvolved contralateral control group, severe SCFE hips had persistently significantly decreased motion (mean flexion 59±32 degrees vs. 122±9 degrees, P <0.001; mean IR in 90 degrees of flexion -5±14 degrees vs. 36±11 degrees, P <0.001). Similarly, the impingement-free motion was improved after derotation osteotomy, and impingement-free flexion after a 30 degrees derotation was equivalent to the control group (113± 42 degrees vs. 122±9 degrees, P =0.052). However, even after the 30 degrees derotation, the impingement-free IR in 90 degrees of flexion persisted lower (13±15 degrees vs. 36±11 degrees, P <0.001). Following the simulation of flexion-derotation osteotomy, mean impingement-free flexion and IR in 90 degrees of flexion increased for combined correction of 20 degrees (20 degrees flexion and 20 degrees derotation) and 30 degrees (30 degrees flexion and 30 degrees derotation). Although mean flexion was equivalent to the control group for both (20 degrees and 30 degrees) combined correction, the mean IR in 90 degrees of flexion persisted decreased, even after the 30 degrees combined flexion-derotation (22±22 degrees vs. 36 degrees±11, P =0.009)., Conclusions: Simulation of derotation-osteotomy (30 degrees correction) and flexion-derotation-osteotomy (20 degrees correction) normalized hip flexion for severe SCFE patients, but IR in 90 degrees of flexion persisted slightly lower despite significant improvement. Not all SCFE patients had improved hip motion with the performed simulations; therefore, some patients may need a higher degree of correction or combined treatment with osteotomy and cam-resection, although not directly investigated in this study. Patient-specific 3D-models could help individual preoperative planning for severe SCFE patients to normalize the hip motion., Level of Evidence: III, case-control study., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Introduction: Slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE) is the most common hip disorder in adolescent patients that can result in complex 3 dimensional (3D)-deformity and hip preservation surgery (eg, in situ pinning or proximal femoral osteotomy) is often performed. But there is little information about location of impingement.Purpose/Questions: The purpose of this study was to evaluate (1) impingement-free hip flexion and internal rotation (IR), (2) frequency of impingement in early flexion (30 to 60 degrees), and (3) location of acetabular and femoral impingement in IR in 90 degrees of flexion (IRF-90 degrees) and in maximal flexion for patients with untreated severe SCFE using preoperative 3D-computed tomography (CT) for impingement simulation., Methods: A retrospective study involving 3D-CT scans of 18 patients (21 hips) with untreated severe SCFE (slip angle>60 degrees) was performed. Preoperative CT scans were used for bone segmentation of preoperative patient-specific 3D models. Three patients (15%) had bilateral SCFE. Mean age was 13±2 (10 to 16) years and 67% were male patients (86% unstable slip, 81% chronic slip). The contralateral hips of 15 patients with unilateral SCFE were evaluated (control group). Validated software was used for 3D impingement simulation (equidistant method)., Results: (1) Impingement-free flexion (46±32 degrees) and IRF-90 degrees (-17±18 degrees) were significantly ( P <0.001) decreased in untreated severe SCFE patients compared with contralateral side (122±9 and 36±11 degrees).(2) Frequency of impingement was significantly ( P <0.001) higher in 30 and 60 degrees flexion (48% and 71%) of patients with severe SCFE compared with control group (0%).(3) Acetabular impingement conflict was located anterior-superior (SCFE patients), mostly 12 o'clock (50%) in IRF-90 degrees (70% on 2 o'clock for maximal flexion). Femoral impingement was located on anterior-superior to anterior-inferior femoral metaphysis (between 2 and 6 o'clock, 40% on 3 o'clock and 40% on 5 o'clock) in IRF-90 degrees and on anterior metaphysis (40% on 3 o'clock) in maximal flexion and frequency was significantly ( P <0.001) different compared with control group., Conclusion: Severe SCFE patients have limited hip flexion and IR due to early hip impingement using patient-specific preoperative 3D models. Because of the large variety of hip motion, individual evaluation is recommended to plan the osseous correction for severe SCFE patients., Level of Evidence: Level III., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Background: Slipped capital femoral epiphyses (SCFE) is associated with out-toeing of the foot and external rotation gait. But it is unknown if SCFE patients treated with the modified Dunn procedure have out-toeing at follow up.Therefore, we used instrumented gait analysis and questioned (1) do severe SCFE patients treated with a modified Dunn procedure have symmetrical foot progression angle (FPA) compared with contralateral side and compared with asymptomatic volunteers (2) what is the prevalence of out-toeing gait and what are the outcome socres at follow up., Methods: Gait analysis of 22 patients (22 hips) treated with an unilateral modified Dunn procedure for severe SCFE (slip angle >60 degrees, 2002 to 2011) was retrospectively evaluated. Of 38 patients with minimal 5-year follow up, 2 hips (4%) had avascular necrosis of the femoral head and were excluded for gait analysis. Twenty-two patients were available for gait analysis at follow up (mean follow up of 9±2 y). Mean age at follow up was 22±3 years. Mean preoperative slip angle was 64±8 degrees (33% unstable slips) and decreased postoperatively (slip angle of 8±4 degrees). Gait analysis was performed with computer-based instrumented walkway system (GAITRite) to measure FPA with embedded pressure sensors. Patients were compared with control group of 18 healthy asymptomatic volunteers (36 feet, mean age 29±6 y)., Results: (1) Mean FPA of SCFE patients (3.6±6.4 degrees) at follow up was not significantly different compared with their contralateral side (5.6±5.5 degrees) and compared with FPA of controls (4.0±4.5 degrees). (2) Of the 22 SCFE patients, most of them (19 hips, 86%) had normal FPA (-5 to 15 degrees), 2 patients had in-toeing (FPA<-5 degrees) and 1 had out-toeing (FPA >15 degrees) and was not significantly different compared with control group. (3) Mean modified Harris hip score (mHHS) was 93±11 points, mean Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS) score was 91±10 points. Three patients (14%) had mHHS <80 points and walked with normal FPA. The 2 patients with in-toeing and one patient with out-toeing had mHHS >95 points., Conclusions: Patients with severe SCFE treated with modified Dunn procedure had mostly symmetrical FPA and good hip scores at long term follow up. This is in contrast to previous studies. Although 1 patient had out-toeing and 2 patients had in-toeing at follow up, they had good hip scores., Level of Evidence: Level III-retrospective comparative study., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)