Telescoping screw fixation compared to traditional in situ screw fixation for slipped capital femoral epiphysis: clinical, radiographic and patient-reported outcomes.

This study compares clinical, radiographic and patient-reported outcomes among telescoping and traditional screws for the treatment of slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE). We hypothesized that telescoping screws would prevent slip progression and result in preserved femoral neck growth and improved patient-reported outcomes. Traditional screws were compared to telescoping screws in a 2:1 matched cohort based on age at initial surgery, length of radiographic follow-up and whether or not the hip was pinned prophylactically or as a treatment for SCFE. Neck length and telescoping screw length were measured. The patient-reported outcomes were obtained at routine clinic visits. Total 42 hips were included with a mean follow-up of 24.5 ± 3.3 months. No patients developed avascular necrosis, chondrolysis or needed revision surgical procedures. Telescoping screws increased in length for the entire cohort by a mean of 6.0 ± 4.3 mm. Neck length change was not different in SCFE hips when treated with traditional screws vs. telescoping screws (P = 0.527). However, there was a difference in neck length change between the two groups when comparing prophylactically treated hips (P = 0.001). There were no significant differences in patient-reported outcomes among hips treated with telescoping screws compared to traditional screws. Traditional and telescoping screws are both effective for the treatment of SCFE. Telescoping screws have an advantage when prophylactically treating hips that are at risk of slipping as they don't lead to the coxa breva that is seen with traditional screws. However, both treatment methods had similar patient-reported outcomes.

Adolescent Posterior-Superior Glenoid Labral Pathology: Does Involvement of the Biceps Anchor Make a Difference?

BACKGROUND: Adolescent athletes are at risk of sustaining an injury to the posterior and superior labrum of the glenoid. Limited information is available regarding the outcomes of surgical intervention in this specific age cohort. PURPOSE: To compare those patients with pure posterior pathology and those with posterior labral tears that involve the biceps anchor (superior labrum anterior-posterior [SLAP] tears) to determine risks for failure in the surgical management. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed on all patients under the age of 19 years over an 8-year period to identify those treated for superior and posterior labral pathology, followed by chart review, radiographic review, and arthroscopic findings. Patient characteristics and other variables were recorded, including cause (traumatic vs atraumatic), activity/sports (overhead vs nonoverhead), involvement of the biceps anchor-crossing the 12-o'clock position (posterior vs SLAP), associated pathologies, outcome scores (Single Assessment Numerical Evaluation [SANE] and Pediatric/Adolescent Shoulder Survey [PASS] scores), and complications. RESULTS: Forty-eight patients (30 boys, 18 girls) with a mean age at surgery of 16.5 years (range, 13.5-19 years) were identified who met criteria, with a mean follow-up of 4.1 years (range, 1.3-6.9 years). Nineteen patients had SLAP tears and 29 patients had posterior tears. All but 2 regularly participated in sports at the time of their injury; of the athletes, 26 (56.5%) played an overhead sport and 20 (43.5%) played a nonoverhead sport. The cause of the injury was traumatic in 25 cases (52.1%) and atraumatic in 23 cases (47.9%). Outcome scores were not significantly different between cause or type of sports played; SANE scores were not significantly different by tear type (mean SLAP score, 88.4 compared with mean posterior score, 80.9; P = .124); but the mean PASS score in the SLAP group was 88.7, compared with 76.2 in the posterior group (P = .005) at final assessment. Only 1 SLAP patient had failed management (5.3%) compared with 5 patients in the posterior-only cohort (17.2%). CONCLUSION: Posterior SLAP tears have better outcomes and lower failure rates than posterior-only tears in the adolescent population. Posterior-superior labral tears can occur in all sports types with multiple causes, but the only factor that appears to play a role in ultimate outcome is whether the tear crosses under the biceps anchor to the anterior side.