Lederer C, Hosalkar H S, Tiderius C J, Westhoff B, Bittersohl B, Krauspe R
Orthopädische Klinik, Universitätsklinikum Düsseldorf, Moorenstraße 5, 40225, Düsseldorf, Deutschland.
Center for Hip Preservation and Children's Orthopedics, San Diego, USA.
Orthopade. 2019 Aug;48(8):659-667. doi: 10.1007/s00132-019-03733-6.
The purpose of this review is to present the pros and cons as well as the surgical techniques of conventional implants used for fixation of slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE). Worth mentioning are K‑wires, Hansson pins, transfixing screws, and gliding screws. We searched PubMed for "ECF" and "SCFE" in combination with "in situ fixation," "pin," "wire," "screw," and "nail." We considered Johansson nail, Knowles pin, and Nyström nail to be obsolete and of historical interest only. We noticed a trend from absolute stability towards some form of dynamic fixation over time, likely related to considerations of growth disturbance of the proximal femur and also the inherent potential for remodeling with time.
本综述的目的是介绍用于固定股骨头骨骺滑脱(SCFE)的传统植入物的优缺点及手术技术。值得一提的有克氏针、汉森针、贯穿螺钉和滑动螺钉。我们在PubMed上搜索了“骨骺滑脱(ECF)”和“股骨头骨骺滑脱(SCFE)”,并与“原位固定”“销”“金属丝”“螺钉”和“钉”组合。我们认为约翰逊钉、诺尔斯针和尼斯特伦钉已过时,仅具有历史意义。随着时间的推移,我们注意到一种从绝对稳定向某种形式的动态固定发展的趋势,这可能与对股骨近端生长干扰的考虑以及随着时间推移重塑的内在潜力有关。