Research
Print page Print page
Switch language
Rigshospitalet - a part of Copenhagen University Hospital
Published

Use of a distraction-to-stall lengthening procedure in magnetically controlled growing rods: A single-center cohort study

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

DOI

  1. Conservative treatment of main thoracic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: Full-time or nighttime bracing?

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  2. Treatment of benign and borderline bone tumors with combined curettage and bone defect reconstruction

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  3. Comparison of two alternative wound closure methods for tumor arthroplasty of the hip: A frequency matched cohort study

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  4. Mortality and health-related quality of life in patients surgically treated for spondylodiscitis

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  1. Is pseudarthrosis after spinal instrumentation caused by a chronic infection?

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  2. Modic Changes Are Not Associated With Long-term Pain and Disability: A Cohort Study With 13-year Follow-up

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

View graph of relations

PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to assess the outcome of patients treated with magnetically controlled growing rods (MCGRs) using a standardized distraction procedure with intended distraction-to-stall and to compare the outcomes between idiopathic and nonidiopathic patients.

METHODS: This was a retrospective single-center cohort study. Conversion cases were excluded. Distractions were performed with 2- to 3-month intervals with the intention of distraction-to-stall on both rods. Distraction length was measured on X-rays every 6 months. Spinal height was assessed using T1-T12 and T1-S1 annual increase.

RESULTS: 19 patients (eight idiopathic and 11 nonidiopathic) were included. Mean age at surgery was 9.7 ± 1.9 years, and median follow-up was 1.9 years (interquartile range (IQR): 1.3-2.2). Major curve improved from median 76° (IQR: 64-83) preoperatively to 42° (IQR: 32-51) postoperatively ( p < 0.001) corresponding to a curve correction of 43% (IQR: 33-51). Correction was maintained at 1- and 2-year follow-up. Median annual T1-T12 and T1-S1 height increase were 10 mm (IQR: 6-16) and 11 mm (IQR: 7-33), respectively. A total of 159 distraction procedures were performed; 83.5% of these were distracted-to-stall, and 16.5% were stopped due to discomfort. Median rod distraction per procedure was 2.0 mm (IQR: 1.6-2.7) for the concave side and 1.7 mm (IQR: 1.4-2.5) for the convex side. Five patients had implant-related complications. Patients with nonidiopathic etiology were significantly younger and had lower flexibility compared with idiopathic patients ( p ≤ 0.040). However, we found no statistically significant difference in curve correction, spinal height increase, distraction length, or complications between the two groups ( p ≥ 0.109).

CONCLUSION: MCGR effectively corrected the deformity and increased spinal height using a distraction procedure with intended distraction-to-stall. Five of 19 patients had implant-related complications, and we found no difference in the outcomes between idiopathic and nonidiopathic patients.

Original languageEnglish
JournalJournal of orthopaedic surgery (Hong Kong)
Volume26
Issue number2
Pages (from-to)2309499018779833
ISSN1022-5536
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 7 Jun 2018

ID: 56465897