Patients treated by magnetic growing rods for early-onset scoliosis reach the expected average growth.

INTRODUCTION: Magnetic controlled growing rods (MCGRs) are one of the most common procedures to treat early-onset scoliosis (EOS). One of the major concerns is that patients treated with MGCR do not reach an adequate height with MGCR. The present study has one of the largest sample sizes of EOS patients treated by MGCR. This study aims to demonstrate the efficacy of the treatment with MGCR in EOS patients, comparing our results with the estimated growth. METHODS: Patients were consecutively enrolled from July 2011 to July 2022. The same surgical equipe performed all the procedures. The mean length of the patients was assessed by X-ray (T2-T12 and T2-S1 distance) by a team of expert radiologists. The estimated growth by Dimeglio was compared with the mean elongation obtained by year. RESULTS: 65 patients were included. 16 patients underwent final surgery. In group 1, patients reached a growth of 3.6 ± 8.7 mm (T2-T12) and 9.6 ± 27.6 mm (T2-S1). In group 2, patients grew 5.4 ± 5.7 mm (T2-T12) and 9 ± 9 mm (T2-S1).81% of the estimated elongation during the treatment was obtained during the first surgery. The difference between Dimeglio's estimated growth and the value obtained by MGCR was -4.3 ± 8.7 mm(T2-T12) and -12.3 ± 12.2 mm (T2-S1) in group 1 (p < 0.001) and -1.1 ± 4.2 mm (T2-T12) and -6.6 ± 6.0 mm (T2-S1) in group 2 (p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: MGCR patients reached and overlapped the growth target according to the score by Dimeglio. However, the value of growth tended to reduce over the years. Lastly, obtaining the most significant elongation possible at the first surgery is mandatory, comprising 81% of the total value.

Ultrasonographic assessment of magnetic growing rods overestimates the lengthening of the thoracic spine compared to radiographs in early-onset scoliotic patients.

PURPOSE: Magnetic growing rods (MGRs) are one of the most common procedures to treat early-onset scoliosis (EOS). Radiographic examinations (X-ray) or ultrasonographic (US) assessments are used to evaluate the lengthening of the rods. X-ray exposes patients to radiation, while the US has not been validated and may be affected by the radiologist's ability to assess elongation. The research question of the present study is to compare the difference between US and X-ray growth assessments in EOS patients treated with MGRs. METHODS: The study enrolled 65 patients consecutively from July 2011 to July 2022. Noninvasive lengthening was performed every four months, and X-ray follow-up was performed at different intervals. An experienced radiologist assessed the mean US rod elongation per session. The mean elongation/session of T2-T12 and T2-S1 was calculated, and the results were compared using an independent t-test. RESULTS: The mean age at operation was 8.8 ± 2 years, and the mean follow-up was four ± two years. The average rod elongation assessed by the US was 3.1 ± 0.1 mm. The average rod elongation evaluated by X-ray was 1.2 ± 2.9 mm (T2-T12) and 1.8 ± 1.9 mm (T2-S1). The difference between the values measured by US and X-ray was statistically significant in the T2-T12 group (p < 0.05) and not significant in the T2-S1 group (p = 0.34). CONCLUSIONS: This is the most extensive single-center study comparing US and X-ray data for MGRs in EOS patients. US overestimates thoracic spine elongation compared to X-ray. US elongation analysis could be appropriate in long thoracolumbar curves.

Spinal alignment, surgery, and outcomes in cervical deformity: A practical guide to aid the spine surgeon.

Compared to the thoracolumbar spine, the literature on cervical spine alignment is scarce. While a consistent number of articles have been published, few analyze the ideal surgical approaches for each type of deformity and the optimal amount of correction to achieve. This paper provides a comprehensive review of current literature on cervical spinal deformities (with or without myelopathy) and their surgical management; it is our goal to create a framework on which surgical planning can be made. A general assessment of the actually utilized parameters and correlation between the cervical and thoracolumbar spine alignment is presented. Moreover, we provide an analysis of cervical surgical approaches (anterior, posterior, or combined), techniques (laminoplasty, laminectomy and fusion, anterior cervical discectomy and fusion, corpectomy), and their indications. Finally, a complete evaluation of outcomes and postoperative health-related quality of life (HRQOL) measures based on questionnaires (NDI, VAS, SF-36, mJOA) is discussed. Several prospective studies would be useful in understanding how cervical alignment may be important in the assessment and treatment of cervical deformities with or without myelopathy. In particular, future works should concentrate on the correlation between cervical alignment parameters, disability scores, and myelopathy outcomes. We propose, via comprehensive literature review, a guide of practical key points on surgical techniques, cervical alignment, and symptom improvement goals surgeons should aim to achieve for each patient.

Impact of imaging modality, age, and gender on craniocervical junction angles in adults without structural pathology.

CONTEXT: Multiple angles of the craniocervical junction (CCJ) are associated with pathological conditions and surgical outcomes, including the clivo-axial angle (CXA), clival slope (CS), and sagittal axis (XS). However, there are varying normative ranges reported and a paucity of data analyzing the effects of imaging modality, age, and gender on these angles. SETTING AND DESIGN: A retrospective review of computed tomographic (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans in fifty adults without CCJ pathology from 2014 to 2019. METHODS: Age, gender, indication, and hours between scans were recorded. Two-blinded observers measured all angles. Analysis between angles from the same patient was performed using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Multivariable linear regression was used to test for associations between average angles and age or gender. RESULTS: Average age and time between scans were 41.3 and 14.3 h, respectively, with 94% performed due to trauma. On CT, average CXA, CS, and XS were 162.1°, 118.4°, and 81.3°, respectively. On MRI, they were 159.8°, 117.2°, 85.3°, respectively. There were statistically significant differences between CXA and XS (P < 0.01) based on imaging modality. On CT, there was a significant increase in XS by 1.93°° and decrease in CS by 1.88°° and on MRI, there was a significant increase in CXA by 1.93°° and decrease in CS by 2.75°° corresponding with a 10-year advancement of age. Gender did not have an effect. CONCLUSION: There are significant differences in angular measurements of the CCJ between CT and MRI from the same patient, as well as changes in normative values based on age.