Epiphysiodesis for Leg-Length Discrepancy
Surgical technique guide for permanent growth-plate arrest to equalise leg-length discrepancy - timing, growth prediction, percutaneous drill/curette, Phemister, and percutaneous transphyseal screw (PETS) techniques
Reviewed by OrthoVellum Editorial Team
Editorial maintenance, source checking, and correction workflow β’ Published by OrthoVellum Medical Education Team
Permanent growth-plate arrest of the longer limb to equalise leg length | intermediate
Surgical Imaging



Critical Concepts and Exam Traps
Timing Is Irreversible
The trap: Treating epiphysiodesis like a reversible adjustment. Once the physis is destroyed it does not recover β there is no second chance to fine-tune length.
The fix: Confirm bone age (Greulich-Pyle), recalculate predicted discrepancy at maturity using at least one validated method, and choose the operative date so that the remaining growth of the long limb exactly equals the discrepancy to be corrected.
Bone Age vs Chronological Age
Location of error: Using the child's birthday rather than skeletal maturity. A delayed or advanced bone age of one to two years completely changes how much growth remains.
Risk: Mistiming by even a year alters the final correction by roughly 1 cm at the distal femur. Always obtain a current left-hand and wrist radiograph (Greulich-Pyle) or use the Sauvegrain elbow method around the pubertal growth spurt.
Asymmetric Arrest = Angular Deformity
Location: Incomplete obliteration of part of the physis β a peripheral medial or lateral bridge keeps growing while the rest is arrested.
Risk: A residual medial bar produces valgus, a lateral bar produces varus. For a length-equalisation epiphysiodesis the arrest must be COMPLETE and symmetric across the entire physis, ablating the peripheral perichondrial ring.
Epiphysiodesis vs Lengthening
Epiphysiodesis: Best for predicted LLD of roughly 2 to 5 cm in a skeletally immature child with growth to spare β low morbidity but sacrifices height.
Lengthening: For discrepancies greater than 5 cm, or when shortening the long limb is unacceptable β distraction osteogenesis (frame or magnetic nail), longer, higher complication burden.
Permanent vs Temporary (Hemi)
Permanent epiphysiodesis: Destroys the whole physis to STOP LENGTH β drill/curette, Phemister, or PETS used to bridge the entire plate.
Hemiepiphysiodesis: Tethers ONE SIDE of the physis (tension-band plate / staples) to correct ANGULAR deformity β guided growth, typically reversible by removing the implant.
Height and Contralateral Knee Level
Counselling point: The family must understand the child loses centimetres of final height and the knee on the operated side ends up at a slightly lower level than genetic potential would predict.
Implication: Document predicted final height, discuss cosmesis of overall stature versus a lengthening alternative, and obtain informed consent specifically covering the height trade-off and the small risk of mistiming.
A.R.R.E.S.TARREST β Principles of Permanent Epiphysiodesis
A.S.S.E.S.SASSESS β Work-up of Leg-Length Discrepancy
Surgical Indications
Ideal Candidate
- Predicted leg-length discrepancy at maturity of roughly 2 to 5 cm β the sweet spot for epiphysiodesis
- Sufficient growth remaining in the long limb to make up the discrepancy before physeal closure
- Skeletally immature β bone age before the end of growth (broadly girls up to ~14 years, boys up to ~16 years bone age, but timing is calculated individually)
- A family who understands and accepts the loss of final height in exchange for avoiding lengthening
Relative Indications
- Discrepancy of less than 2 cm rarely needs surgery β shoe raise or observation is usually sufficient
- Discrepancy of 2 to 2.5 cm may be managed non-operatively in some patients; epiphysiodesis offered if symptomatic or progressive
- Mild discrepancy in the context of an underlying syndrome where lengthening morbidity is undesirable
Contraindications
Absolute:
- Skeletal maturity reached (physis closed β no growth left to arrest)
- Predicted discrepancy greater than 5 cm where shortening the long limb would leave the patient unacceptably short β favour lengthening
- Active infection at the operative site
Relative:
- Very large discrepancies better served by lengthening (or combined lengthening plus contralateral epiphysiodesis)
- Significant short stature where any height loss is poorly tolerated
- Uncertain or unreliable growth prediction (insufficient serial data, ambiguous bone age)
Why Timing Is Everything
The entire success of the operation depends on doing it at the moment when the growth that the long limb has left to give exactly equals the discrepancy you wish to correct. Arrest is permanent and immediate β the physis stops growing from the day of surgery.
- Too early β the long limb stops growing while too much growth remains; the short limb overtakes it β overcorrection (now the previously short leg is longer)
- Too late β insufficient growth remains in the long limb to make up the difference β undercorrection (residual discrepancy)
Growth Prediction Drives the Operative Date
Three validated methods are used (covered in detail in the next tab):
- Green-Anderson growth-remaining charts (built on Menschik data)
- Moseley straight-line graph
- Paley multiplier method
All require bone age, not chronological age. A delayed or advanced skeletal age of one to two years substantially changes the remaining-growth estimate.
Epiphysiodesis vs Limb Lengthening β Choosing the Strategy
Clinical Decision Scenarios
Use these scenarios to practise clinical reasoning and management decisions
"An 11-year-old girl is referred with a leg-length discrepancy following a previous distal femoral physeal injury. Clinically her right leg is 2 cm shorter. How would you assess her and decide whether epiphysiodesis is appropriate?"
"Talk me through the timing calculation for an epiphysiodesis. A boy has a predicted discrepancy of 3 cm at maturity and you plan to arrest the distal femur of the long limb. How do you decide the moment to operate?"
"You performed a percutaneous distal femoral epiphysiodesis 18 months ago. At follow-up the child has developed a progressive valgus deformity of that knee. What has happened and how do you manage it?"
Epiphysiodesis for Leg-Length Discrepancy β Exam Day Summary
Clinical summary
Key Evidence
Growth and predictions of growth in the lower extremities (Green-Anderson data)
A straight-line graph for leg-length discrepancies
Multiplier method for predicting limb-length discrepancy
Percutaneous epiphysiodesis: experimental study and preliminary clinical results
Efficacy and late complications of percutaneous epiphysiodesis with transphyseal screws (PETS)
Additional References
- MΓ©taizeau JP, Wong-Chung J, Bertrand H, Pasquier P (1998). Percutaneous epiphysiodesis using transphyseal screws (PETS). J Pediatr Orthop 18:363-9. PMID 9600565. β Original description of PETS; mean bone-length inequality fell from 2.47 cm to 0.51 cm at maturity across 32 cases.
- Bowen JR, Johnson WJ (1984). Percutaneous epiphysiodesis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 190:170-3. PMID 6488627. β Original clinical description of percutaneous drill/curette epiphysiodesis under image intensification.
- Phemister DB (1933). Operative arrestment of longitudinal growth of bones in the treatment of deformities. J Bone Joint Surg Am 15:1-15. β Original description of the open bone-block (Phemister) epiphysiodesis technique (predates PubMed indexing).
- Aguilar JA, Paley D, Paley J, et al. (2005). Clinical validation of the multiplier method... part II. J Pediatr Orthop 25:192-6. PMID 15718900. DOI 10.1097/01.bpo.0000150808.90052.7c. β Validation cohort: multiplier method mean error for residual discrepancy ~0.9-1.0 cm, more accurate than Moseley for residual LLD after epiphysiodesis.