Slipped capital femoral epiphysis: is it worth the risk and cost not to offer prophylactic fixation of the contralateral hip?
Controversy remains whether the contralateral hip should be fixed in patients presenting with unilateral slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE). This retrospective study compares the outcomes and cost of those patients who had prophylactic fixation with those who did not. Between January 2000 and...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The bone & joint journal 2015-10, Vol.97-B (10), p.1428-1434 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Controversy remains whether the contralateral hip should be fixed in patients presenting with unilateral slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE). This retrospective study compares the outcomes and cost of those patients who had prophylactic fixation with those who did not. Between January 2000 and December 2010 a total of 50 patients underwent unilateral fixation and 36 had prophylactic fixation of the contralateral hip. There were 54 males and 32 females with a mean age of 12.3 years (9 to 16). The rate of a subsequent slip without prophylactic fixation was 46%. The risk of complications was greater, the generic health measures (Short Form-12 physical (p < 0.001) and mental (p = 0.004) summary scores) were worse. Radiographic cam lesions in patients presenting with unilateral SCFE were only seen in patients who did not have prophylactic fixation. Furthermore, prophylactic fixation of the contralateral hip was found to be a cost-effective procedure, with a cost per quality adjusted life year gained of £1431 at the time of last follow-up. Prophylactic fixation of the contralateral hip is a cost-effective operation that limits the morbidity from the complications of a further slip, and the diminished functional outcome associated with unilateral fixation. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 2049-4394 2049-4408 |
DOI: | 10.1302/0301-620X.97B10.33931 |