These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Comparative study of pinning in situ and open epiphysiodesis in 105 patients with slipped capital femoral epiphyses.
    Author: Zahrawi FB, Stephens TL, Spencer GE, Clough JM.
    Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res; 1983; (177):160-8. PubMed ID: 6861391.
    Abstract:
    One hundred five patients were treated for slipped capital femoral epiphyses during the period from 1964 to 1976. Attempts were made to evaluate the differences in results of multiple pinning and open epiphysiodesis performed to treat this problem. Pinning in situ was performed in 61 hips, and open epiphysiodesis was performed in 33 hips. The average follow-up period was seven years four months for pinning in situ and six years seven months for open epiphysiodesis. The average slippage was 22 degrees for patients treated by pinning in situ and 30 degrees for patients treated by open epiphysiodesis. At follow-up evaluation 91.7% of the patients treated by pinning in situ had good or excellent results, as compared with 71.6% of the patients treated by epiphysiodesis. For the patients treated by pinning in situ, 5% had poor results, and 3.3% were considered failures. For the patients treated by epiphysiodesis, 3.4% had poor results, while 25% were considered failures. Pinning in situ is the treatment of choice. It is more predictable, has less complications, and provides better long-term results.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]