Is anterior subcapital shortening osteotomy a reliable and reproducible technique in the treatment of severe slipped capital femoral epiphysis?

INTRODUCTION: Proximal femoral shortening osteotomies are becoming the treatment of choice for severe slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE) to reduce the risk of femoroacetabular impingement. The reported rates of complication seem reasonable, but these are single-operator series with surgeons highly experienced in this technique. The purpose of this study was to assess how surgeon experience impacted the outcomes of anterior subcapital shortening osteotomy (ASSO) in severe SCFE. HYPOTHESIS: The hypothesis was that ASSO is a reproducible technique that is accessible to junior surgeons. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All ASSOs performed for severe SCFE (slipangle > 40°) between 2015 and 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. All osteotomies were performed by surgeons with less than 4 years' experience (senior residents), who were trained by a senior surgeon experienced in this technique (Group 1). The incidence of femoral head avascular necrosis (AVN) and complications were analyzed and compared to a historical control cohort (Group 2). RESULTS: A total of 62 SCFEs (37 unstable and 25 stable) were analyzed. Both groups had similar demographic data and SCFE characteristics. The mean operative times were statistically comparable in both groups. The rates of AVN in unstable SCFEs and in the overall series were comparable in both groups (18.9% vs. 13.3%, p=.55 and 12.9% vs. 9.7%, p=.6). These rates were comparable in the stable forms (4.0% vs. 5.4%; p=1). However, the preoperative MRI in Group 1 showed that 42.8% of unstable hips that developed AVN were already hypoperfused before surgery. The overall rate of complication showed no significant difference between the 2 groups (26% vs. 17%, p=.16). DISCUSSION: Although ASSO is a technically demanding procedure, it is reliable and reproducible. The main risk factor for developing AVN remains the unstable nature of SCFE and not the surgeon's experience. It can be performed by trained junior surgeons, but not in an emergency setting, with the possibility of assistance from a more experienced surgeon. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV; retrospective case study.

Evaluation of a Prehospital Rotation by Senior Residents: A Web-Based Survey.

The added value of prehospital emergency medicine is usually assessed by measuring patient-centered outcomes. Prehospital rotations might however also help senior residents acquire specific skills and knowledge. To assess the perceived added value of the prehospital rotation in comparison with other rotations, we analyzed web-based questionnaires sent between September 2011 and August 2020 to senior residents who had just completed a prehospital rotation. The primary outcome was the perceived benefit of the prehospital rotation in comparison with other rotations regarding technical and non-technical skills. Secondary outcomes included resident satisfaction regarding the prehospital rotation and regarding supervision. A pre-specified subgroup analysis was performed to search for differences according to the participants' service of origin (anesthesiology, emergency medicine, or internal medicine). The completion rate was of 71.5% (113/158), and 91 surveys were analyzed. Most senior residents found the prehospital rotation either more beneficial or much more beneficial than other rotations regarding the acquisition of technical and non-technical skills. Anesthesiology residents reported less benefits than other residents regarding pharmacological knowledge acquisition and confidence as to their ability to manage emergency situations. Simulation studies should now be carried out to confirm these findings.