Abstract
Slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE) is a growing problem amongst children in Hawai‘i as well as throughout the world. With increasing rates of childhood obesity, SCFEs are affecting more patients at younger ages. This makes the treatment of SCFEs critical as many children with SCFEs have significant growth remaining. There are a host of treatment options based on different classification schemes which can make it difficult to determine the appropriate care for a SCFE patient. In our practice, patients are treated based on a combination of angular displacement, stability as defined by Loder, and patient age. The procedures vary from single screw in-situ fixation for a mild deformity to a modified Dunn procedure for a high-grade deformity in the skeletally immature patient. For all our open fixation methods, epiphyseal perfusion is monitored with an 18-gauge needle attached to an arterial monitor and we routinely remove fixation after physeal closure. Excellent outcomes have been noted for the modified Dunn in our practice. This article describes the algorithm used to treat SCFE in Hawai‘i at a tertiary children's medical center.
Keywords: slipped capital femoral epiphysis, Hawai‘i, pacific island, modified dunn, intertrochanteric osteotomy, screw fixation, gliding, growing, intraoperative monitoring, arterial perfusion, obesity
Introduction
Mechanism
Slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE) is a result of shear forces overwhelming the proximal femoral physis in prepubescent and adolescent children. The epiphysis remains posterior in the acetabulum as the metaphysis shifts anterior and rotates externally. The impact of the shear stress across the physis is amplified with increased body weight and high impact activities. Hip morphology such as acetabular and femoral neck retroversion can contribute to the increased risk of SCFE.1
Signs and Symptoms
Patients with SCFEs often present with either hip and/or knee pain.2 They will typically have an antalgic gait with increased external rotation of the affected leg.3 This can be identified with a positive Drehmann test where the patient externally rotates their affected leg when the hip is flexed. In patients with a SCFE, internal rotation is usually painful or not possible due to impingement.
Incidence
The incidence of SCFE varies among different ethnicities. Pacific Islanders have a 4–5 times higher incidence of SCFE compared to European populations.4 There is also a higher incidence of SCFEs in Samoans.5 With a large population of both Samoans and Pacific Islanders in Hawai‘i, SCFEs are commonplace amongst pediatric orthopedic practices here in Hawai‘i.
Risk Factors
SCFEs have been shown to be associated with childhood obesity as well as low socioeconomic status.6,7 One study from Scotland noted that as childhood obesity rates increased during their study period, there was a 2.5 fold increase in the incidence of SCFEs from 1981 to 2000.8 There is also evidence that endocrine factors such as hypothyroidism, hypogonadism, and hypopituitarism are risk factors for developing a SCFE.9
Complications
The SCFE deformity has significant implications on hip biomechanics. The resulting femoroacetabular impingement leads to accelerated degenerative changes and an increased likelihood of developing osteoarthritis of the affected hip. One of the most severe complications of SCFEs is avascular necrosis (AVN) of the femoral head.10–12
Classification
Temporal Classification
SCFEs can be characterized based on the duration of symptoms. Acute SCFEs are symptomatic for a duration of three weeks or less while chronic SCFEs are symptomatic for greater than three weeks. Acute on chronic SCFEs are defined as an exacerbation of symptoms in a chronic SCFE. This classification has not been shown to have significant prognostic value and is therefore not as applicable in the clinical setting.13
Loder Classification
Loder used symptomatology to define the stability of SCFEs in his paper written in 1998. He defined a SCFE as stable if the patient was able to ambulate with or without crutches. If they were unable to ambulate with or without crutches, it was deemed to be unstable.14 This definition has been shown to be highly predictive of development of AVN. Their original series had an AVN rate of 47% in the unstable group and 0% in the stable group.13 More recently the rate of AVN in unstable SCFEs have been shown to be less than originally described but remains significant at 21%.15
Degrees of Displacement
Another way to grade the severity of SCFEs is to look at the degree of displacement. Southwick defined the angle of displacement as the measure between the femoral epiphysis and the diaphysis (Figure 1). Mild SCFEs have a Southwick angle < 30 degrees, moderate 30–60 degrees, and severe > 60 degrees. This classification is useful in guiding treatment options and choice of fixation.16
Figure 1.

Photo demonstrating the Southwick angle of a left SCFE.40
The severity of the slip also predicts the natural history of SCFEs with more severe slips resulting in higher rates of osteoarthritis and poor patient outcome scores. There is an emphasis on restoring normal hip biomechanics in unstable SCFEs to prevent femoroacetabular impingement and degenerative joint changes.10,12,16,17
In Situ Screw Fixation
The standard treatment for mild chronic SCFEs is epiphysiodesis with a single screw through the femoral neck and into the epiphysis. This serves to neutralize the shear forces across the physis and prevent further slip. Some recommend that at least 5 threads cross the physis to provide optimal biomechanical stability and prevent slip progression.18,19 Screw penetration is a potential complication that can lead to chondrolysis. In order to avoid chondrolysis, a screw tip to subchondral bone (STSB) distance of 2.5-5mm is recommended.20 In a recent cadaveric study by Heffernan, et al, it was determined that only about 20% of C-arm radiographs were able to accurately determine STSB distance within a 1mm tolerance. They recommend using the known screw pitch of the in-situ screw to estimate the STSB distance to avoid screw penetration.21 We use the approachwithdraw method to minimize the risk of screw penetration. This involves rotating the leg from an internally rotated position to an externally rotated position while viewing the in-situ screw under fluoroscopy.3 The STSB distance will decrease and then increase as the leg is rotated thus allowing you to determine the true STSB distance.
The number of screws needed to maintain stability is controversial. Karol, et al, found a 33% increase in stiffness with 2 screws in a bovine model.22 However, clinical studies suggest a higher rate of complications like pin penetration and osteonecrosis with the use of multiple screws.2
In the setting of an acute unstable SCFE with a Southwick angle < 30 degrees, our standard treatment is urgent fixation (Figure 2a). Due to the inherently unstable nature of these SCFEs, we prefer to use 2 fully threaded screws. We routinely remove all SCFE screws after physeal closure and this is easily accomplished with the fully threaded screws. We also do a needle decompression of the capsule and monitor perfusion with an 18-gauge needle fluoroscopically guided into the epiphysis and attached to an arterial line monitor.24
Figure 2.

2a: Algorithm for Treating Unstable SCFE.
2b: Algorithm for Treating Stable SCFEs.
Implant Selection
Although epiphysiodesis is optimal in children close to bone maturity, it may be less desirable in younger patients with significant bone growth remaining. Arresting the femoral capital growth can result in a short femoral neck, coxa vara, and relative trochanteric overgrowth. These deformities can disturb regular hip biomechanics and potentially result in pain and gait imbalance.25
With these complications in mind, attention has turned to implants which preserve femoral neck growth. Studies looking at such implants have demonstrated that preserving the femoral capital physis allows for improved remodeling of the SCFE deformity.26–29 Preserving growth has become increasingly more relevant as younger children are developing SCFEs at an earlier age. One study in Scotland noted a correlation between the increased rate of SCFEs at an earlier age with an increase in childhood obesity rates.8
The Synthes SCFE screw is a partially threaded screw with a shaft diameter equal to the threads to facilitate removal (Figure 3). One disadvantage to this screw is that the screw must be left proud in order to allow for growth. This may be symptomatic as the iliotibial band can rub against the head of the screw, especially in younger patients where the screw needs to be left even more proud to facilitate additional growth.
Figure 3.

Synthes In-Situ SCFE Screw
Another growth facilitating SCFE screw is the Pega Medical free gliding screw. This screw has a telescoping design which allows for continued growth without being prominent (Figure 4). The Pega screw relies on a compression force across the physis to prevent slip progression. One potential concern with that is the amount of compression may not be enough to prevent further deformity. In a biomechanical animal model study by Upasani, et al,30 they found that an even distribution of threads 40%–60% in a 16mm partially threaded screw across the physis gave optimal biomechanical stability.30 If too many of the threads were in the physis the construct failed with the screw plowing in the neck. The growth implants currently available are designed to have the threads fully inserted in the epiphysis with none crossing the physis. This may reduce the load to failure. A biomechanical study comparing the Pega and the Synthes SCFE screws with a standard fully threaded screw found them to both be as effective as the standard fully threaded screw.28 Currently there is very little clinical information in terms of long-term outcomes or hardware complications, so more studies are needed before it becomes standard of practice. We are currently incorporating this screw into our practice for select patients that are generally less than eleven years of age (Figure 2b).
Figure 4.

Pega Gliding Screw
Intertrochanteric Flexion Osteotomy
In a moderate SCFE deformity (30–60 degrees) the metaphysis of the femoral neck begins to impinge on the anterior acetabulum and external rotation cannot accommodate for the deformity in flexion. This leads to significant acetabular and labral damage and accelerates degenerative changes in the hip joint.31 Moderate deformities also lead to limited hip flexion and abduction, increased trunk sway, reduced step distance and velocity, and decreased strength at the hip and knee.32,33
In our practice, a stable moderate SCFE is treated with an in-situ screw fixation urgently on initial presentation to prevent slip progression (Figure 2b). We address the remaining deformity with an intertrochanteric flexion osteotomy. The osteotomy is fixed with a ninety-degree blade plate. Extra care is taken to avoid a z-deformity of the femur to allow for a total hip arthroplasty in the future if it is required. The intertrochanteric osteotomy anteverts the femoral head relative to the shaft and prevents further impingement by moving the metaphyseal femur away from the anterior acetabulum. The osteotomy also allows for correction of the rotational deformity and restores the articular-to-trochanteric distance thus improving extensor strength and hip mechanics. This procedure can also be used in patients with mild SCFE and residual impingement not amenable to arthroscopic treatment alone. Several retrospective groups have studied the outcome of the intertrochanteric flexion osteotomy and have demonstrated improved functional scores and less radiographic osteoarthritis compared to untreated deformities.34,35 There is limited evidence regarding the impact of intertrochanteric osteotomies on total hip arthroplasty. One study by Haverkamp, et al, found that there was no difference in 10- or 15-year survival rates of total hip arthroplasties amongst patient with intertrochanteric osteotomies compared to patients without a previous osteotomy.36
Modified Dunn Procedure
We treat severe chronic stable SCFEs as well as moderate or severe unstable SCFEs with a modified Dunn procedure since an intertrochanteric osteotomy is insufficient for deformity correction (Figure 2a, 2b). The procedure is performed by surgically dislocating the hip by a trochanteric flip approach as described by Ganz. The epiphysis is mobilized on its vascular pedicle of the ascending cervical vessels and is then reduced with two or three 3.0mm K-wires. We remove the posterior femoral neck callus to aid in the reduction of the epiphysis and we remove the physeal cartilage in the femoral head fragment to improve epiphysiodesis. Epiphyseal perfusion is monitored with an 18-gauge spinal needle attached to an arterial line monitor. Measurements are taken before reduction, after reduction, and continuously during capsular closure to ensure adequate perfusion throughout the procedure. There is some controversy regarding the use of the modified Dunn on a stable SCFE with a severe deformity.37 We have had success with this operation on severe stable SCFEs and believe that the benefits of preventing impingement and further degenerative joint disease outweigh the potential risks. The rates of avascular necrosis after the Modified Dunn procedure vary widely with reports between 2%–26%.38,39 This suggests that both the technical considerations of surgery and patient selection are key to achieving excellent results.
Conclusion
SCFEs are a growing problem amongst children in Hawai‘i as well as throughout the world.8 The algorithm implemented at the tertiary children's medical center in Hawai‘i takes certain variables into account to assist with clinical decision making. Excellent outcomes have been noted thus far with utilization of this algorithm in Hawai‘i.
Abbreviations
- AVN
avascular necrosis
- SCFE
slipped capital femoral epiphysis
- STSB
screw tip to subchondral bone
Conflicts of Interest
None of the authors identify any conflicts of interest.
References
- 1.Gelberman RH, Cohen MS, Shaw BA, Kasser JR, Griffin PP, Wilkinson RH. The association of femoral retroversion with slipped capital femoral epiphysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1986;68((7)):1000–1007. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Matava MJ, Patton CM, Luhmann S, Gordon JE, Schoenecker PL. Knee pain as the initial symptom of slipped capital femoral epiphysis: an analysis of initial presentation and treatment. J Pediatr Orthop. 1999;19((4)):455–460. doi: 10.1097/00004694-199907000-00007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Aronsson DD, Loder RT, Breur GJ, Weinstein SL. Slipped capital femoral epiphysis: current concepts. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2006;14((12)):666–679. doi: 10.5435/00124635-200611000-00010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Stott S, Bidwell T. Epidemiology of slipped capital femoral epiphysis in a population with a high proportion of New Zealand Maori and Pacific children. N Z Med J. 2003;116((1184)):U647–XXX. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Fedorak GT, Brough AK, Miyamoto RH, Raney EM. The Epidemiology of Slipped Capital Femoral Epiphysis in American Samoa. Hawaii J Med Public Health. 2018;77((9)):215–219. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Perry DC, Metcalfe D, Costa ML, Van Staa T. A nationwide cohort study of slipped capital femoral epiphysis. Arch Dis Child. 2017;102((12)):1132–1136. doi: 10.1136/archdischild-2016-312328. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Perry DC, Metcalfe D, Lane S, Turner S. Childhood Obesity and Slipped Capital Femoral Epiphysis. Pediatrics. 2018;142((5)) doi: 10.1542/peds.2018-1067. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Murray AW, Wilson NI. Changing incidence of slipped capital femoral epiphysis: a relationship with obesity? J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2008;90((1)):92–94. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.90B1.19502. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Herngren B, Stenmarker M, Vavruch L, Hagglund G. Slipped capital femoral epiphysis: a population-based study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2017;18((1)):304–XXX. doi: 10.1186/s12891-017-1665-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Carney BT, Weinstein SL, Noble J. Long-term follow-up of slipped capital femoral epiphysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1991;73((5)):667–674. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Terjesen T, Wensaas A. Prognostic factors for long-term outcome of chronic slipped capital femoral epiphysis treated with fixation. J Child Orthop. 2017;11((2)):114–119. doi: 10.1302/1863-2548-11-160285. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Carney BT, Weinstein SL. Natural history of untreated chronic slipped capital femoral epiphysis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1996;((322)):43–47. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Loder RT, Richards BS, Shapiro PS, Reznick LR, Aronson DD. Acute slipped capital femoral epiphysis: the importance of physeal stability. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1993;75((8)):1134–1140. doi: 10.2106/00004623-199308000-00002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Loder RT. Slipped capital femoral epiphysis. Am Fam Physician. 1998;57((9)):2135–2142. 2148–2150. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Loder RT. What is the cause of avascular necrosis in unstable slipped capital femoral epiphysis and what can be done to lower the rate? J Pediatr Orthop. 2013;33(Suppl 1):S88–91. doi: 10.1097/BPO.0b013e318277172e. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Kuzyk PR, Kim YJ, Millis MB. Surgical management of healed slipped capital femoral epiphysis. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2011;19((11)):667–677. doi: 10.5435/00124635-201111000-00003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Terjesen T, Wensaas A. Prognostic factors for long-term outcome of chronic slipped capital femoral epiphysis treated with fixation in situ. J Child Orthop. 2017;11((2)):114–119. doi: 10.1302/1863-2548-11-160285. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Carney BT, Birnbaum P, Minter C. Slip progression after in situ single screw fixation for stable slipped capital femoral epiphysis. J Pediatr Orthop. 2003;23((5)):584–589. doi: 10.1097/00004694-200309000-00004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Wensaas A, Svenningsen S, Terjesen T. Long-term outcome of slipped capital femoral epiphysis: a 38-year follow-up of 66 patients. J Child Orthop. 2011;5((2)):75–82. doi: 10.1007/s11832-010-0308-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Stambough JL, Davidson RS, Ellis RD, Gregg JR. Slipped capital femoral epiphysis: an analysis of 80 patients as to pin placement and number. J Pediatr Orthop. 1986;6((3)):265–273. doi: 10.1097/01241398-198605000-00002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Heffernan MJ, Snyder B, Zhou H, Li X. Fluoroscopic imaging overestimates the screw tip to subchondral bone distance in a cadaveric model of slipped capital femoral epiphysis. J Child Orthop. 2017;11((1)):36–41. doi: 10.1302/1863-2548-11-160174. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Karol LA, Doane RM, Cornicelli SF, Zak PA, Haut RC, Manoli A. Single versus double screw fixation for treatment of slipped capital femoral epiphysis: a biomechanical analysis. J Pediatr Orthop. 1992;12((6)):741–745. doi: 10.1097/01241398-199211000-00008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Tokmakova KP, Stanton RP, Mason DE. Factors influencing the development of osteonecrosis in patients treated for slipped capital femoral epiphysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003;85((5)):798–801. doi: 10.2106/00004623-200305000-00004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Schrader T, Jones CR, Kaufman AM, Herzog MM. Intraoperative Monitoring of Epiphyseal Perfusion in Slipped Capital Femoral Epiphysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2016;98((12)):1030–1040. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.15.01002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Wölfle-Roos JV, Urlaub S, Reichel H, Taurman R. Significantly lower femoral neck growth in screw fixation of the asymptomatic contralateral hip in unilateral slipped capital femoral epiphysis. J Pediatr Orthop B. 2016;25((3)):197–201. doi: 10.1097/BPB.0000000000000285. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Falciglia F, Aulisa AG, Giordano M, Guzzanti V. Fixation in slipped capital femoral epiphysis avoiding femoral-acetabular impingement. J Orthop Surg Res. 2017;12((1)):163–XXX. doi: 10.1186/s13018-017-0663-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Holmdahl P, Backteman T, Danielsson A, Karrholm J, Riad J. Continued growth after fixation of slipped capital femoral epiphysis. J Child Orthop. 2016;10((6)):643–650. doi: 10.1007/s11832-016-0793-x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Leblanc E, Bellemore JM, Cheng T, Little DG, Birke O. Biomechanical considerations in slipped capital femoral epiphysis and insights into prophylactic fixation. J Child Orthop. 2017;11((2)):120–127. doi: 10.1302/1863-2548-11-170012. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Ortegren J, Bjorklund-Sand L, Engbom M, Tiderius CJ. Continued Growth of the Femoral Neck Leads to Improved Remodeling After In Situ Fixation of Slipped Capital Femoral Epiphysis. J Pediatr Orthop. 2018;38((3)):170–175. doi: 10.1097/BPO.0000000000000797. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Upasani V, Kishan S, Oka R, et al. Biomechanical analysis of single screw fixation for slipped capital femoral epiphysis: are more threads across the physis necessary for stability? J Pediatr Orthop. 2006;26((4)):474–478. doi: 10.1097/01.bpo.0000217732.24041.81. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Sink EL, Zaltz I, Heare T, Dayton M. Acetabular cartilage and labral damage observed during surgical hip dislocation for stable slipped capital femoral epiphysis. J Pediatr Orthop. 2010;30((1)):26–30. doi: 10.1097/BPO.0b013e3181c6b37a. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Song KM, Halliday S, Reilly C, Keezel W. Gait abnormalities following slipped capital femoral epiphysis. J Pediatr Orthop. 2004;24((2)):148–155. doi: 10.1097/00004694-200403000-00003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Hummel S, Rosenthal D, Zilkens C, Hefter H, Krauspe R, Westhoff B. Gait deviations in transverse plane after SCFE in dependence on the femoral offset. Gait Posture. 2017;58:358–362. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2017.08.026. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.Erickson JB, Samora WP, Klingele KE. Treatment of chronic, stable slipped capital femoral epiphysis via surgical hip dislocation with combined osteochondroplasty and Imhauser osteotomy. J Child Orthop. 2017;11((4)):284–288. doi: 10.1302/1863-2548.11.160259. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Kartenbender K, Cordier W, Katthagen BD. Long-term follow-up study after corrective Imhauser osteotomy for severe slipped capital femoral epiphysis. J Pediatr Orthop. 2000;20((6)):749–756. doi: 10.1097/00004694-200011000-00010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Haverkamp D, de Jong PT, Marti RK. Intertrochanteric osteotomies do not impair long-term outcome of subsequent cemented total hip arthroplasties. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006;444:154–160. doi: 10.1097/01.blo.0000194066.10227.1e. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Ziebarth K, Milosevic M, Lerch TD, Steppacher SD, Slongo T, Siebenrock KA. High Survivorship and Little Osteoarthritis at 10-year Followup in SCFE Patients Treated With a Modified Dunn Procedure. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2017;475((4)):1212–1228. doi: 10.1007/s11999-017-5252-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Tannast M, Jost LM, Lerch TD, Schmaranzer F, Ziebarth K, Siebenrock KA. The modified Dunn procedure for slipped capital femoral epiphysis: the Bernese experience. J Child Orthop. 2017;11((2)):138–146. doi: 10.1302/1863-2548-11-170046. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39.Sankar WN, Vanderhave KL, Matheney T, Herrera-Soto JA, Karlen JW. The modified Dunn procedure for unstable slipped capital femoral epiphysis: a multicenter perspective. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013;95((7)):585–591. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.L.00203. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Jones CE, Cooper AP, Doucette J, et al. Southwick angle measurements and SCFE slip severity classifications are affected by frog-lateral positioning. Skeletal Radiol. 2018;47((1)):79–84. doi: 10.1007/s00256-017-2761-z. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
