Aims

The aim of this study was to compare outcomes after growth-friendly treatment for early-onset scoliosis (EOS) between patients with skeletal dysplasias versus those with other syndromes.

Abstract

MAGnetic Expansion Control (MAGEC) rods are used in the surgical treatment of children with early onset scoliosis. The magnetically controlled lengthening mechanism enables rod distractions without the need for repeated invasive surgery. The CE certification of these devices was suspended in March 2021 due, primarily, to performance evidence gaps in the documents provided by the manufacturer to regulators and notified bodies. MAGEC rods are therefore not permitted for use in countries requiring CE marking. This was a survey of 18 MAGEC rod surgeons in the UK about their perception of the impact of the CE suspension on the clinical management of their patients. Unsurprisingly, virtually all perceived a negative impact, reflecting the complexity of this patient group. Reassuringly, these surgeons are highly experienced in alternative treatment methods.

Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(2):155–157.

Aims. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of patients with early-onset scoliosis (EOS), who had undergone spinal fusion after distraction-based spinal growth modulation using either traditional growing rods (TGRs) or magnetically controlled growing rods (MCGRs). Methods. We undertook a retrospective review of skeletally mature patients who had undergone fusion for an EOS, which had been previously treated using either TGRs or MCGRs. Measured outcomes included sequential coronal T1 to S1 height and major curve (Cobb) angle on plain radiographs and any complications requiring unplanned surgery before final fusion. Results. We reviewed 43 patients (63% female) with a mean age of 6.4 years (SD 2.6) at the index procedure, and 12.2 years (SD 2.2) at final fusion. Their mean follow-up was 8.1 years (SD 3.4). A total of 16 patients were treated with MCGRs and 27 with TGRs. The mean number of distractions was 7.5 in the MCGR group and ten in the TGR group (p = 0.471). The mean interval between distractions was 3.4 months in the MCGR group and 8.6 months in the TGR group (p < 0.001). The mean Cobb angle had improved by 25.1° in the MCGR group and 23.2° in TGR group (p = 0.664) at final follow-up. The mean coronal T1 to S1 height had increased by 16% in the MCGR group and 32.9% in TGR group (p = 0.001), although the mean T1 to S1 height achieved at final follow-up was similar in both. Unplanned operations were needed in 43.8% of the MCGR group and 51.2% of TGR group (p = 0.422). Conclusion. In this retrospective, single-centre review, there were no significant differences in major curve correction or gain in spinal height at fusion. Although the number of planned procedures were fewer in patients with MCGRs, the rates of implant-related complications needing unplanned revision surgery were similar in the two groups. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(2):257–264

Aims

To report the mid-term results of a modified self-growing rod (SGR) technique for the treatment of idiopathic and neuromuscular early-onset scoliosis (EOS).

Aims

To investigate metallosis in patients with magnetically controlled growing rods (MCGRs) and characterize the metal particle profile of the tissues surrounding the rod.

Aims

Magnetically controlled growing rods (MCGR) have been gaining popularity in the management of early-onset scoliosis (EOS) over the past decade. We present our experience with the first 44 MCGR consecutive cases treated at our institution.

Aims. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the performance and safety of magnetically controlled growth rods in the treatment of early onset scoliosis. Secondary aims were to evaluate the clinical outcome, the rate of further surgery, the rate of complications, and the durability of correction. Patients and Methods. We undertook an observational prospective cohort study of children with early onset scoliosis, who were recruited over a one-year period and followed up for a minimum of two years. Magnetically controlled rods were introduced in a standardized manner with distractions performed three-monthly thereafter. Adverse events which were both related and unrelated to the device were recorded. Ten children, for whom relevant key data points (such as demographic information, growth parameters, Cobb angles, and functional outcomes) were available, were recruited and followed up over the period of the study. There were five boys and five girls. Their mean age was 6.2 years (2.5 to 10). Results. The mean coronal Cobb angle improved from 57.6° (40° to 81°) preoperatively, 32.8° (28° to 46°) postoperatively, and 41° (19° to 57°) at two years. Five children had an adverse event, with four requiring return to theatre, but none were related to the device. There were no neurological complications or infections. No devices failed. One child developed a proximal junctional kyphosis. The mean gain in spinal column height from T1 to S1 was 45.4 mm (24 to 81) over the period of the study. Conclusion. Magnetically controlled growth rods provide an alternative solution to traditional growing rods in the surgical management of children with early onset scoliosis, supporting growth of the spine while controlling curve progression. Their use has clear psychosocial and economic benefits, with the reduction of the need for repeat surgery as required with traditional growing rods. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:507–15