TY - JOUR
T1 - Traditional growing rods versus magnetically controlled growing rods for the surgical treatment of early-onset scoliosis
T2 - A case-matched 2-year study
AU - Akbarnia, Behrooz A.
AU - Pawelek, Jeff B.
AU - Cheung, Kenneth M C
AU - Demirkiran, Gokhan
AU - Elsebaie, Hazem
AU - Emans, John B.
AU - Johnston, Charles E.
AU - Mundis, Gregory M.
AU - Noordeen, Hilali
AU - Skaggs, David L.
AU - Sponseller, Paul D.
AU - Thompson, George H.
AU - Yaszay, Burt
AU - Yazici, Muharrem
N1 - Funding Information:
Author disclosures: ABA (none); PJB (none); CKMC (none); DG (none); EH (none); EJB (none); JCE (none); MGM (none); NH (none); SDL (grants from POSNA and Scoliosis Research Society ; personal fees from Biomet, Medtronic; non-financial support from Growing Spine Study Group , Scoliosis Research Society , Growing Spine Foundation Medtronic Strategic Advisory Board ; personal fees from expert testimony; personal fees from Biomet, Medtronic, Stryker, Wolters Kluwer Health–Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; other from Medtronic, Stryker, Biomet, Medtronic, outside the submitted work; patent issued by Medtronic); SPD (none); TGH (none); YB (none); YM (none).
Funding Information:
This study was financially supported by the Growing Spine Foundation and Ellipse Technologies .
Publisher Copyright:
© 2014 Scoliosis Research Society.
PY - 2014/11/1
Y1 - 2014/11/1
N2 - Introduction Traditional growing rod (TGR) surgery is a treatment technique commonly used for progressive early-onset scoliosis. Studies have shown that repeated TGR lengthenings can significantly increase the risk of complications. Magnetically controlled growing rods (MCGR) are currently available outside of the United States and early results have been promising. The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of MCGR versus TGR for the treatment of early-onset scoliosis.Methods Magnetically controlled growing rod patients were selected based on the following criteria: aged less than 10 years, major curve greater than 30°, thoracic height less than 22 cm, no previous spine surgery, and minimum 2-year follow-up. A total of 17 MCGR patients met the inclusion criteria, 12 of whom had complete data available for analysis. Each MCGR patient was matched with a TGR patient by etiology, gender, single versus dual rods, preoperative age, and preoperative major curve.Results Magnetically controlled growing rod patients had a mean age of 6.8 years and mean follow-up of 2.5 years. Mean follow-up was greater for TGR patients by 1.6 years. Major curve correction was similar between MCGR and TGR patients throughout treatment. The MCGR patients experienced an average of 8.1 mm/year increase in T1-S1 during the lengthening period, compared with 9.7 mm/year for TGR patients (p =.73). There was a mean increase in T1-T12 of 1.5 mm/year for MCGR patients and 2.3 mm/year for TGR patients (p =.83). The TGR patients had 73 open surgeries, 56 of which were lengthenings. The MCGR patients had 16 open surgeries and 137 noninvasive lengthenings. Three TGR patients underwent 5 unplanned revision surgeries whereas 3 MCGR patients underwent 4 unplanned revisions.Conclusions Major curve correction was similar between MCGR and TGR patients throughout treatment. Annual T1-S1 and T1-12 growth was also similar between groups. The MCGR patients had 57 fewer surgical procedures than TGR patients. Incidence of unplanned surgical revisions as a result of complications was similar between groups.
AB - Introduction Traditional growing rod (TGR) surgery is a treatment technique commonly used for progressive early-onset scoliosis. Studies have shown that repeated TGR lengthenings can significantly increase the risk of complications. Magnetically controlled growing rods (MCGR) are currently available outside of the United States and early results have been promising. The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of MCGR versus TGR for the treatment of early-onset scoliosis.Methods Magnetically controlled growing rod patients were selected based on the following criteria: aged less than 10 years, major curve greater than 30°, thoracic height less than 22 cm, no previous spine surgery, and minimum 2-year follow-up. A total of 17 MCGR patients met the inclusion criteria, 12 of whom had complete data available for analysis. Each MCGR patient was matched with a TGR patient by etiology, gender, single versus dual rods, preoperative age, and preoperative major curve.Results Magnetically controlled growing rod patients had a mean age of 6.8 years and mean follow-up of 2.5 years. Mean follow-up was greater for TGR patients by 1.6 years. Major curve correction was similar between MCGR and TGR patients throughout treatment. The MCGR patients experienced an average of 8.1 mm/year increase in T1-S1 during the lengthening period, compared with 9.7 mm/year for TGR patients (p =.73). There was a mean increase in T1-T12 of 1.5 mm/year for MCGR patients and 2.3 mm/year for TGR patients (p =.83). The TGR patients had 73 open surgeries, 56 of which were lengthenings. The MCGR patients had 16 open surgeries and 137 noninvasive lengthenings. Three TGR patients underwent 5 unplanned revision surgeries whereas 3 MCGR patients underwent 4 unplanned revisions.Conclusions Major curve correction was similar between MCGR and TGR patients throughout treatment. Annual T1-S1 and T1-12 growth was also similar between groups. The MCGR patients had 57 fewer surgical procedures than TGR patients. Incidence of unplanned surgical revisions as a result of complications was similar between groups.
KW - Case-matched comparative study
KW - Early-onset scoliosis
KW - Magnetically controlled growing rods
KW - Traditional growing rod
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84908364039&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84908364039&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jspd.2014.09.050
DO - 10.1016/j.jspd.2014.09.050
M3 - Article
C2 - 27927412
AN - SCOPUS:84908364039
SN - 2212-134X
VL - 2
SP - 493
EP - 497
JO - Spine Deformity
JF - Spine Deformity
IS - 6
ER -