Comparison of the Effects of Magnetically Controlled Growing Rod and Tradiotinal Growing Rod Techniques on the Sagittal Plane in the Treatment of Early-Onset Scoliosis.

OBJECTIVE

Comparing the effects of magnetically controlled growing rod (MCGR) and traditional growing rod (TGR) techniques on the sagittal plane in the treatment of early-onset scoliosis (EOS).

METHODS

Twelve patients were operated using dual MCGR technique in one center, while 15 patients were operated using dual TGR technique for EOS in another center. Patients' demographic characteristics, complications and radiological measurements such as cobb angle, thoracic kyphosis, lumbar lordosis, T1-S1 range (mm), proximal junctional angle, distal junctional angle, sagittal balance, coronal balance, pelvic incidence, sacral slope and pelvic tilt were assessed and compared in preoperative, postoperative and last follow-up period.

RESULTS

Age and sex distributions were similar in both groups. The mean number of lengthening in the MCGR group was 12 (8-15) and 4.8 (3-7) in the TGR group. Two techniques were shown to be effective in controlling the curvature and in the increase of T1-S1 distance. In TGR group, four patients had rod fractures, six patients had screw pull-out and four patients had an infection, whereas three patients had screw pull-out and one patient had infection complications in the MCGR group.

CONCLUSION

There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of cobb angle, coronal and sagittal balance and sagittal pelvic parameters. MCGR can cause hypokyphosis and proximal junctional kyphosis in a minimum 2-year follow-up period. The implant-related complications were less in the MCGR group. However, larger case groups and longer follow-up periods are required for the better understanding of the superiority of one method on other in terms of complications.