Paediatrics

Guided Growth / Hemiepiphysiodesis (Tension-Band Plating)

Surgical technique guide for temporary hemiepiphysiodesis with tension-band plating (eight-Plate) for paediatric coronal and sagittal angular deformity - growth-plate principles, CORA planning, overcorrection avoidance, reversibility and rebound

Core Procedure
intermediate
By OrthoVellum Medical Education Team

Reviewed by OrthoVellum Editorial Team

Editorial maintenance, source checking, and correction workflow โ€ข Published by OrthoVellum Medical Education Team

High-yield overview

Temporary tethering of one side of an open physis to gradually correct angular deformity | intermediate

Surgical Imaging

Tension-band (eight-) plate across a knee physis
A tension-band (eight-) plate spans the physis with one epiphyseal and one metaphyseal screw, acting as a flexible hinge that tethers one side of the growth plate.Credit: AI-generated medical image ยท OrthoVellum
Guided growth correcting genu valgum
Guided growth: tethering the medial side of the distal femoral physis while the lateral side keeps growing gradually corrects genu valgum โ€” and is fully reversible on plate removal.Credit: AI-generated medical image ยท OrthoVellum
Pre and post guided-growth alignment radiographs
Standing long-leg alignment radiographs before and after medial distal femoral tension-band plating, with the mechanical axis restored through the centre of the knee.Credit: AI-generated medical image ยท OrthoVellum

Critical Danger Structures and Exam Traps

Insufficient Growth Remaining

The trap: Offering guided growth to a child near skeletal maturity. With little growth left there is no biological engine to drive correction โ€” the deformity persists and the family is misled.

The fix: Confirm meaningful growth remains โ€” bone age, Tanner staging, menarchal status, and physeal appearance. As a rule, allow at least 12-18 months of growth. If insufficient, plan a corrective osteotomy instead.

Overcorrection / Set-and-Forget

The trap: Inserting the plate and not following the child closely. The physis continues to be tethered after neutral alignment is reached and the limb deforms in the OPPOSITE direction.

The fix: Review every 3-4 months with standing long-leg alignment radiographs. Remove the plate PROMPTLY once the mechanical axis is neutral. Younger, fast-growing children overshoot quickly โ€” review them more frequently.

Screw Across the Physis

Location: Both screws must straddle the physis โ€” one purely in the epiphysis, one purely in the metaphysis. A screw that crosses the physeal cartilage acts like a transphyseal bar.

Risk: Crossing the physis causes a focal arrest and permanent deformity โ€” the opposite of the intended effect. Use intra-operative fluoroscopy in two planes to confirm both screws are clear of the physis.

Wrong Level โ€” Plan at the CORA

The trap: Plating the proximal tibia for a deformity whose apex (CORA) is at the distal femur, or vice versa, leaves the true deformity uncorrected and creates a secondary translational deformity.

The fix: Obtain standing long-leg radiographs, measure mLDFA and MPTA, identify the CORA, and place the plate over the physis responsible for the deformity (femoral, tibial, or both for combined deformity).

Rebound After Removal

Why it happens: Younger children with substantial growth remaining can rebound (partial recurrence) after hardware removal, especially in pathological physes (Blount, rickets, dysplasia).

Implications: Counsel families that a second episode of guided growth may be needed. Consider deliberate mild overcorrection in conditions with a high rebound tendency, and continue follow-up after removal until maturity.

Pathological vs Idiopathic Physis

Idiopathic genu valgum/varum: Healthy physis responds predictably and relatively quickly to tethering.

Blount, rickets, skeletal dysplasia: Abnormal/stiff physes respond slowly and unpredictably, with higher failure, slower correction and higher rebound. Optimise metabolic disease (rickets) before and during treatment.

Mnemonic

G.R.O.W.T.HGROWTH โ€” Prerequisites and Principles of Guided Growth

Mnemonic

T.E.T.H.E.RTETHER โ€” Assessing the Angular Deformity

Surgical Indications

Absolute / Strong Indications

  • Progressive pathological angular deformity (genu valgum or varum) with significant growth remaining
  • Mechanical axis deviation beyond physiological limits for age, causing symptoms or progression
  • Blount disease (infantile and adolescent tibia vara) with an open, viable physis
  • Metabolic/rachitic deformity (e.g. hypophosphataemic rickets) once medical control is optimised
  • Sagittal-plane deformity โ€” fixed knee flexion (anterior distal femoral plating) in cerebral palsy / dysplasia

Relative Indications

  • Post-traumatic partial physeal injury producing progressive angulation (with sufficient remaining physis)
  • Skeletal dysplasia (e.g. achondroplasia, multiple epiphyseal dysplasia) with symptomatic malalignment
  • Asymmetric deformity at multiple levels (combined femoral and tibial plating)
  • Mild leg-length asymmetry combined with angular deformity (deformity-led correction)

Contraindications

Absolute:

  • Closed or near-closed physis / skeletal maturity โ€” no growth engine; perform an osteotomy instead
  • Active infection at the operative site

Relative:

  • Physiological genu valgum/varum (normal developmental variant โ€” observe; valgum peaks ~3-4 years)
  • Uncontrolled metabolic bone disease (correct rickets first โ€” physis will not respond reliably)
  • Very stiff/abnormal physis (severe Blount, bar) where response is unpredictable โ€” counsel on slower correction and rebound

Key Principle โ€” Growth Modulation, Not Correction at Surgery

Guided growth does not acutely correct deformity. It tethers one side of an open physis (the convex/longer side over the deformity apex) so that the untethered side continues to grow, gradually swinging the limb back towards a neutral mechanical axis. The correction is therefore biological and time-dependent, proportional to the growth rate of the involved physis and the remaining growth.

Evidence Base

Tension-Band Plating (Stevens)

  • Stevens PM (2007): Original prospective description of the non-locking extraperiosteal two-hole tension-band plate ("eight-Plate") for guided growth โ€” a flexible construct that relies on the tension-band principle rather than physeal compression, hinging open as growth proceeds. 32 of 34 patients corrected to neutral, correction roughly 30% faster than stapling, with no permanent growth arrests.
  • The flexible construct avoids the compression across the whole physis seen with staples, theoretically reducing the risk of permanent physeal arrest and allowing the physis to recover after removal.

Tension-Band Plate vs Blount Staple

  • Blount & Clarke (1949): Original description of physeal stapling for growth control โ€” historically the standard, but associated with implant extrusion, breakage, migration and unintended permanent arrest.
  • Comparative series report lower implant failure and extrusion and a more reversible effect with tension-band plates than with rigid staples; Stevens & Klatt directly documented 45% staple migration and 41% rebound, contrasted with no migration in the plate cohort. This is why plating has largely superseded stapling for temporary hemiepiphysiodesis.

Idiopathic vs Pathological Physes

  • Idiopathic genu valgum/varum corrects predictably and relatively quickly (Ballal et al. reported correction faster in children under 10 years).
  • Blount, rickets and skeletal dysplasia correct more slowly, less completely, and rebound more often โ€” patients require closer surveillance and counselling about repeat procedures. In early-onset Blount disease, tension-band plating nonetheless improved Langenskiold stage and mechanical-axis alignment in most limbs and is now advocated as first-line surgical treatment.

Guided growth for angular correction: a preliminary series using a tension band plate

Level IV
Stevens PM โ€ข Journal of Pediatric Orthopedics
Clinical Implication: Establishes the flexible tension-band plate as a reliable, reversible, low-morbidity alternative to osteotomy for paediatric angular deformity, provided growth remains and the plate is removed promptly.

Correcting genu varum and genu valgum in children by guided growth: temporary hemiepiphysiodesis using tension band plates

Level II
Ballal MS, Bruce CE, Nayagam S โ€ข Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (Br)
Clinical Implication: Confirms guided growth is simple and safe for periarticular coronal deformity, that younger children correct faster (and so must be reviewed more often), and that the technique is genuinely reversible.

Guided growth for pathological physes: radiographic improvement during realignment

Level IV
Stevens PM, Klatt JB โ€ข Journal of Pediatric Orthopedics
Clinical Implication: Pathological (rachitic) physes respond to guided growth but rebound substantially; flexible plates outperform staples on migration, and metabolic control must run alongside surgery.

The effect of guided growth surgery on Langenskiold stage and mechanical axis in early-onset Blount disease

Level IV
Hanstein R, Schneble CA, Schulz JF, et al. โ€ข Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons
Clinical Implication: Supports tension-band plating as the first-line surgical option in early-onset Blount disease with an open, viable physis, while acknowledging slower correction and rebound risk that mandate ongoing surveillance.

Temporary Hemiepiphysiodesis โ€” Tension-Band Plate vs Staple vs Permanent vs Osteotomy


Clinical Decision Scenarios

Use these scenarios to practise clinical reasoning and management decisions

CLINICAL SCENARIOStandard

CLINICAL PROMPT

"An 8-year-old girl is referred with progressive, symptomatic genu valgum of the right knee. Standing long-leg radiographs show the mechanical axis lateral to the knee with an abnormal mLDFA and a normal MPTA. There is no metabolic disease. How would you manage her?"

PRACTICAL APPROACH
This child has idiopathic genu valgum with the deformity localised to the distal femur (abnormal mLDFA, normal MPTA), so the centre of rotation of angulation is at the distal femur. At 8 years of age she has substantial growth remaining, so she is an excellent candidate for temporary hemiepiphysiodesis with a tension-band plate rather than an osteotomy. **Confirm prerequisites**: I would confirm meaningful growth remains โ€” clinically (age, Tanner stage) and, if needed, bone age โ€” because guided growth depends entirely on the growth engine of the open physis. I would document the mechanical axis deviation and the CORA on a standing hip-to-ankle film, and confirm the deformity is femoral, not tibial. **Plan**: Because the CORA is at the distal femur and the deformity is valgus, I would place a tension-band plate on the convex (medial) side of the distal femoral physis. The medial side is tethered while the lateral side keeps growing, gradually swinging the limb back to neutral. **Operative technique**: Supine, radiolucent table, fluoroscopy in two planes. Small longitudinal incision over the medial distal femoral physis. Extraperiosteal placement of the plate with the central hole over the physis. Insert the epiphyseal screw first, then the metaphyseal screw, confirming on AP and lateral that both screws straddle but do NOT cross the physis. Protect the saphenous nerve/vein. **The critical part โ€” follow-up**: This is not 'set and forget'. I would review her every 3-4 months with standing alignment radiographs, watching the mechanical axis normalise and the screws diverge. I would remove the plate PROMPTLY once the mechanical axis is neutral, because leaving it in causes overcorrection. After removal I would continue to follow her to maturity because rebound can occur in a child this young.
CLINICAL SCENARIOAdvanced

CLINICAL PROMPT

"What is the difference between temporary hemiepiphysiodesis with a tension-band plate and a permanent epiphysiodesis, and why does the choice of implant (plate versus the older Blount staple) matter?"

PRACTICAL APPROACH
These are fundamentally different operations with different goals. **Temporary hemiepiphysiodesis (guided growth)** tethers ONE side of an open physis with a removable, flexible implant to gradually correct an ANGULAR deformity. It is reversible โ€” once neutral alignment is achieved the hardware is removed and the physis resumes symmetric growth. It depends on growth remaining. **Permanent epiphysiodesis** deliberately and irreversibly ablates a physis (or part of it). Its principal indication is LIMB-LENGTH DISCREPANCY โ€” arresting the longer limb's physis at a calculated time so the shorter limb catches up. It is not designed to be reversed and is timed using growth-prediction methods. **So the goals differ**: guided growth corrects angulation reversibly; permanent epiphysiodesis equalises length irreversibly. A corrective osteotomy is the alternative when no growth remains or the deformity is severe/acute. **Implant choice โ€” tension-band plate vs Blount staple**: Both can achieve hemiepiphysiodesis, but the mechanism and morbidity differ. The Blount staple is a rigid implant placed across the physis; historically it was the standard but had higher rates of implant extrusion, breakage, migration and unintended PERMANENT physeal arrest, partly because of the compression it applies. Stevens' tension-band plate is a flexible, extraperiosteal construct fixed by one epiphyseal and one metaphyseal screw that hinges open as growth proceeds โ€” it acts as a tension band rather than compressing the whole physis. This gives lower implant failure, a more genuinely reversible effect, and lower risk of permanent arrest, which is why the plate has largely replaced the staple.
CLINICAL SCENARIOAdvanced

CLINICAL PROMPT

"A 6-year-old boy with hypophosphataemic rickets had bilateral medial distal femoral tension-band plates inserted 18 months ago and was lost to follow-up. He now returns with the knees deformed in the OPPOSITE direction (varus) and one screw appears broken. What has happened and how do you manage him?"

PRACTICAL APPROACH
Two things have gone wrong here, both consequences of lost follow-up. **What has happened**: First, this is OVERCORRECTION. The plates tethered the medial distal femoral physes to correct valgus, but because he was not reviewed and the hardware was not removed once neutral was reached, the medial tether continued while the lateral physis kept growing โ€” driving the limbs past neutral into varus. Overcorrection is the single commonest reported complication of guided growth and it follows directly from a 'set and forget' approach. Second, a broken screw reflects implant fatigue, which can occur with prolonged retention and excessive screw divergence; it also complicates removal. **Immediate management**: I would obtain standing long-leg alignment radiographs to quantify the new varus and identify the CORA, and assess the broken screw and physeal status (consider CT/MRI if a bar is suspected). I would confirm his metabolic disease is optimally controlled โ€” uncontrolled rickets worsens deformity and recurrence. **Treatment**: The plates must come out. The broken screw should be retrieved (this may need a dedicated broken-screw set; a retained fragment may be left if removal risks excessive bone destruction, with documentation). Having overcorrected into varus, and with growth still remaining, I would then perform guided growth on the OPPOSITE (lateral) side of the distal femoral physis to re-correct towards neutral โ€” exploiting the remaining growth to reverse the iatrogenic deformity. **Going forward**: Strict, reliable follow-up every 3-4 months with alignment films, optimised medical control of the rickets, and counselling the family that rachitic physes correct slowly and rebound, so further episodes may be needed. This case is a powerful illustration that the operation that matters most in guided growth is timely hardware removal.

Guided Growth / Hemiepiphysiodesis (Tension-Band Plating) โ€” Exam Day Summary

Clinical summary

References

  1. Stevens PM (2007). Guided growth for angular correction: a preliminary series using a tension band plate. J Pediatr Orthop 27(3):253-9. PMID 17414005. DOI 10.1097/BPO.0b013e31803433a1. โ€” Original description of the tension-band ("eight-Plate") technique; flexible extraperiosteal construct with reliable correction (32/34 to neutral, ~30% faster than staples) and no permanent growth arrests.

  2. Blount WP, Clarke GR (1949). Control of bone growth by epiphyseal stapling: a preliminary report. J Bone Joint Surg Am 31A(3):464-78. โ€” Original description of physeal stapling for growth control; the historical comparator superseded by tension-band plating.

  3. Stevens PM, Klatt JB (2008). Guided growth for pathological physes: radiographic improvement during realignment. J Pediatr Orthop 28(6):632-9. PMID 18724199. DOI 10.1097/BPO.0b013e3181841fda. โ€” Evidence that pathological (rachitic) physes correct but rebound substantially (41% with staples); flexible plates show lower migration than staples.

  4. Ballal MS, Bruce CE, Nayagam S (2010). Correcting genu varum and genu valgum in children by guided growth: temporary hemiepiphysiodesis using tension band plates. J Bone Joint Surg Br 92(2):273-6. PMID 20130322. DOI 10.1302/0301-620X.92B2.22937. โ€” Clinical series confirming effectiveness for coronal deformity, faster correction under 10 years, and reversibility (no permanent tethers).

  5. Hanstein R, Schneble CA, Schulz JF, et al. (2023). The effect of guided growth surgery on Langenskiold stage and mechanical axis in early-onset Blount disease. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 32(5):e240-e250. PMID 37852243. DOI 10.5435/JAAOS-D-21-00515. โ€” Tension-band plating improved Langenskiold stage in 84% and is advocated as first-line surgical treatment for early-onset Blount disease.

  6. Paley D (2002). Principles of Deformity Correction. Springer. โ€” Reference text on CORA-based deformity analysis (mechanical axis, mLDFA, MPTA) underpinning level selection for guided growth.