Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38748221›Full record

ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2024

Comparison of traditional growth rods and magnetically controlled growing rods in early-onset scoliosis: a case-matched mid term follow-up study.

Anuj Gupta, Abhishek Srivastava, Naveen Pandita, Ankur Goswami, Govindaraja Perumal Vijayaraghavan, Arvind Jayaswal

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Anuj GuptaDepartment of Spine Surgery, Max Superspeciality Hospital, Vaishali, Ghaziabad, India. anuj.toto123@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0001-6816-2995
Abhishek SrivastavaDepartment of Spine Surgery, Max Superspeciality Hospital, Vaishali, Ghaziabad, India.
Naveen PanditaCambridge University Hospital, Cambridge, UK.
Ankur GoswamiDepartment of Spine Surgery, Queens Medical Center. Nottingham University Hospitals, Nottingham, UK.
Govindaraja Perumal VijayaraghavanDepartment of Spine Surgery, MGM Hospital, Chennai, India.
Arvind JayaswalDepartment of Spine Surgery, Max Superspeciality Hospital, Vaishali, Ghaziabad, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeEarly-onset scoliosis (EOS) has always been a challenging situation for spine surgeons. The aim of treatment is to control the direction of curve progression to allow for the complete development of lungs. Among all the growth constructs available, traditional growth rods (TGR) and magnetically controlled growth rods (MCGR) are most widely used. The MCGR has been introduced a few years back and there is a dearth of long-term follow-up studies. The purpose of this study is to compare the effectiveness of TGR and MCGR for the treatment of EOS.

methodsAll patients of EOS managed with either TGR or MCGR were included in the study. The patients managed with other methods or having follow-up < 2-years were excluded from the study. A total of 20 patients were recruited in the MCGR group and 28 patients were recruited in the TGR group. Both groups were matched by etiology, gender, pre-operative radiological parameters, and complications including unplanned surgeries.

resultsThe mean age in our study was 7.90 years in the MCGR group and 7.46 years in the TGR group. The mean duration of follow-up in the MCGR group was 50.89 months and in the TGR group 94.2 months. Pre-operative cobb's angle in the coronal plane and T1-S1 were comparable in both groups with a mean cobb's angle of 65.4 in MCGR and 70.5 in TGR. The mean T1-S1 length in the MCGR group was 36.1cms and in the TGR group was 35.2 cms (p = 0.18). The average increase in T1-S1 length was 1.3 cm/year in the TGR group and 1.1 cm/year in the MCGR group (p > 0.05). The TGR patients underwent 186 open lengthening surgeries and 11 unplanned surgeries for various complications. The MCGR group has 180 non-invasive lengthening with only 4 unplanned returns to OT for various causes.

conclusionThe curve correction was similar in both TGR and MCGR groups. The average T1-S1 length achieved on final follow-up was similar in both groups. The MCGR patients have attained similar correction with fewer invasive procedures and lesser complications compared to the TGR group.

Indexed as

ScoliosisAge of OnsetChildChild, PreschoolFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansInternal FixatorsMaleTreatment OutcomeCongenital scoliosisDistractionEarly onset scoliosisGrowth rodsMCGRTGR

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.