Aims. Slipped upper femoral epiphysis (SUFE) has well documented biochemical and mechanical risk factors. Femoral and acetabular morphologies seem to be equally important. Acetabular retroversion has a low prevalence in asymptomatic adults. Hips with dysplasia, osteoarthritis, and Perthes’ disease, however, have higher rates, ranging from 18% to 48%. The aim of our study was to assess the prevalence of acetabular retroversion in patients presenting with SUFE using both validated radiological signs and tomographical measurements. Methods. A retrospective review of all SUFE surgical cases presenting to the Royal Children’s Hospital, Melbourne, Australia, from 2012 to 2019 were evaluated. Preoperative plain radiographs were assessed for slip angle, validated radiological signs of retroversion, and standardized postoperative CT scans were used to assess cranial and mid-acetabular version. Results. In all, 116 SUFEs presented in 107 patients who underwent surgical intervention; 47 (52%) were male, with a mean age of 12.7 years (7.5 to 16.6). Complete radiological data was available for 91 patients (99 hips) with adequate axial CT imaging of both hips. Overall, 82 patients (82%) underwent pinning in situ (PIS), with subcapital realignment surgery (SRS) performed in 17 patients (18%) (slip angles > 75°). Contralateral prophylactic PIS was performed in 72 patients (87%). On the slip side, 62 patients (68%) had one or more radiological sign of retroversion. Tomographical acetabular retroversion was more pronounced cranially than caudally of the acetabulum on both the affected side and the contralateral side (p < 0.001) as expected in the normal population. Increasing severity of the slip was found to be directly proportional to the degree of reduction in cranial and central acetabular version (p < 0.05) in the SUFE hips. Conclusion. Acetabular retroversion is more prevalent in patients with SUFE than previously reported, and have been shown be correlated to the severity of the slip presentation. The presence of radiological signs of acetabular retroversion could be used to justify prophylactic contralateral pinning. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(2):158–164