Prevalence of Avascular Necrosis Following Surgical Treatments in Unstable Slipped Capital Femoral Epiphysis (SCFE): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

• Main Authors: Vijayanagan Veramuthu (Author), Ismail Munajat (Author), Md Asiful Islam (Author), Emil Fazliq Mohd (Author), Abdul Razak Sulaiman (Author)
• Format: Book
• Published: MDPI AG, 2022-09-01T00:00:00Z.
• Subjects: article
• Online Access: Connect to this object online.
• Notes: 10.3390/children9091374; 2227-9067
• Keywords: unstable slipped capital femoral epiphysis; unstable slip; avascular necrosis; osteonecrosis; Pediatrics; RJ1-570
• Source: Children, Vol 9, Iss 9, p 1374 (2022)

The choice of treatment for unstable and severely displaced slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE) is controversial. This meta-analysis was conducted to determine the prevalence of femoral head avascular necrosis (AVN) following various treatments for unstable SCFE. Various databases were searched to identify articles published until 4 February 2022. A random-effects model was used to examine prevalence as well as risk ratios with confidence intervals (CIs) of 95%. Thirty-three articles were analyzed in this study. The pooled prevalences of AVN in pinning in situ, pinning following intentional closed reduction, pinning following unintentional closed reduction, and open reduction via the Parsch method, subcapital osteotomy and the modified Dunn procedure were 18.5%, 23.0%, 27.6%, 9.9%, 18.6% and 19.9%, respectively. The risk of developing AVN in pinning following intentional closed reduction was found to be 1.62 times higher than pinning in situ; however, this result was not significant. The prevalence of AVN in open reduction was lowest when performed via the Parsch method; however, this finding should be interpreted with caution, since the majority of slips so-treated are of mild and moderate types as compared with the subcapital osteotomy and modified Dunn procedures, which are predominantly used to treat severely displaced slips. As the risk ratio between intentional closed reduction and the modified Dunn method showed no significant difference, we believe that the modified Dunn method has the advantage of meticulously preserving periosteal blood flow to the epiphysis, thus minimizing AVN risk. In comparison with intentional closed reduction, the modified Dunn method is used predominantly in cases of severe slips.