ArticleSpine deformity2020
Is rod diameter associated with the rate of rod fracture in patients treated with magnetically controlled growing rods?
Article in Spine deformity, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Magnetically controlled rod fracture is related to rod diameter but lower than TGR.Spine deformity · 2025Article
- An Analysis of the Food and Drug Administration Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience Database for MAGnetic Expansion Control Spinal Rods.Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science · 2025Article
- Longitudinal comparison of direct medical cost, radiological and health-related quality of life treatment outcomes between traditional growing rods and magnetically controlled growing rods from preoperative to maturity.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
14 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionFew risk factors for fracture in magnetically controlled growing rods (MCGR) have been identified. We hypothesize an increased rate of rod fracture in small diameter rods compared to large diameter rods in patients with early-onset scoliosis (EOS). The purpose of this study was to determine the association between the diameter of MCGR constructs and the rate of rod fracture.
methodsPatients with EOS who underwent MCGR implantation-primary or conversion-from 2013 to 2018 were identified from two registries including 40 centers. Rod diameter sizes greater than 5.0 mm or less than or equal to 5.0 mm were defined as "Large" and "Small" rods, respectively. Only dual-rod constructs were included. The primary outcome measure collected was rod fracture at any point in treatment up to the most recent follow-up. Cox regression was utilized for unequal follow-up to compare rate of breakage at the last follow-up between cohorts.
results527 patients with 1,054 rods were included. 552 (52.4%) rods had a diameter of less than or equal to 5.0 mm and 461 (43.7%) rods had a diameter of greater than 5.0 mm. 41 (3.9%) rods were missing a recorded rod diameter and were not included in the analysis to determine the association between the rate of fracture and rod diameter. 20 (1.9%) total rod fractures occurred: 9 (1.6%) rods with diameters of ≤ 5.0 mm, 10 (2.2%) rods with diameters of > 5.0 mm, and 1 uncategorized rod (p = 0.529). No difference in the rate of rod fracture or survival distribution was found between rod diameters of > 5.0 mm and ≤ 5.0 mm even after stratification by ambulatory status, major coronal curve, weight, or location of anchors. DISCUSSION: Rod fracture appears to be a rare event in dual MCGR constructs and rod diameter does not seem to be associated with the incidence or rate of rod fracture. Surgeons may consider other criteria for selecting rod diameter in their patients such as patient size, amount of surgical correction, single vs. dual constructs, and risk of hardware prominence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.