Comparative Study
Journal Article
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Deficiencies of current methods for the timing of epiphysiodesis.

A review of 71 epiphysiodeses with adequate orthoroentgenographic and skeletal-age data was carried out to compare the accuracy of predicting outcome among the methods of Anderson and Green, Menelaus, and Moseley. Differing the methodology did not have a meaningful effect on their similar but limited accuracy. We advocate the use of the Menelaus method, which is simple and based on chronologic age, as it proved as accurate as any other method. The routine use of serial Gruelich and Pyle skeletal-age data could not be shown to increase the accuracy in predicting outcome over serial chronologic-age data, and thus its value in limb-length inequality is limited. Regardless of the method used, unpredictable results occur in a proportion of patients. The patient and parents should be advised of this when planning strategies for limb-length discrepancy.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app