ArticleJOR spine2025
A Novel Dynamic Growth Rod Inducing Spinal Growth Modulation for the Correction of Spinal Deformities.
Article in JOR spine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Growth rods are the gold standard for treating early-onset scoliosis (EOS). However, current treatments with growth rods do not optimize spinal growth in EOS patients, and frequent distraction surgeries significantly increase complications, imposing considerable economic and psychological burdens on patients. An improved growth rod is urgently required to address the need for dynamic growth and external regulation. Methods: This study designed a novel growth rod (NGR) with unidirectional sliding and external regulation capabilities. By establishing a three-dimensional model of the EOS spine, we simulated the implantation of traditional growth rods (TGR) and NGR. We applied a compressive load of 400 N to test axial stiffness and a moment of 1 NM to assess bending stiffness under six different conditions. Additionally, we evaluated the range of motion (ROM) of the spinal joints, and the distribution of Von Mises stress in vertebrae, intervertebral discs, and the growth rods, and calculated the axial force, moment, fatigue life, and strain energy of the device. Results: NGR exhibits higher axial compression and torsional stiffness than TGR and the Intact group. Additionally, Von Mises stress values for NGR are higher than those for TGR across all operating conditions, albeit with slightly lower total strain energy than TGR. Although Von Mises stress in NGR concentrates near the screw fixation, the fatigue life remains adequate for basic living requirements. Conclusion: Overall, NGR demonstrates superior stiffness and stress distribution. NGR's distraction-based implant features a unidirectional sliding component with a spring-driven mechanism for dynamic correction and a novel non-invasive extension mechanism to reduce infections. Compared to leading EOS implants, NGR offers improved stability, showing promise for enhancing EOS surgical interventions.
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.