ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Magnetically controlled growing rod systems have been introduced over recent years as an alternative to traditional growing rods for management of early onset scoliosis. The purpose of this paper is to report our early experience of a magnetically controlled growing rod system (MAGEC, Ellipse). METHODS: Review of pre-operative, postoperative and follow-up Cobb angles and spinal growth in case series of eight patients with a minimum 23 months' follow-up (23-36 months). RESULTS: A total of six patients had dual rod constructs implanted and two patients received single-rod constructs. Four patients had MAGEC rods as a primary procedure. Four were revisions from other systems. Mean age at surgery in the primary group was 4.5 years (range 3.9-6.9). In patients who had MAGEC as a primary procedure, mean pre-operative Cobb angle was 74° (63-94), with postoperative Cobb angle of 42° (32-56) p ≤ 0.001 (43% correction). Mean Cobb angle at follow-up was 42° (35-50). Spinal growth rate was 6 mm/year. One sustained proximal screw pull out. A final patient sustained a rod fracture. Mean age at surgery in the revision group was 10.9 years (range 9-12.6). Mean pre-operative Cobb angle was 45° (34-69). Postoperative Cobb angle was 42° (33-63) (2% correction). Mean Cobb angle at follow-up was 44° (28-67). Mean spinal growth rate was 12 mm/year. Two patients developed loss of distraction. CONCLUSION: MAGEC growing rod system effectively controls early onset scoliosis when used as either a primary or revision procedure. Although implant-related complications are not uncommon, the avoidance of multiple surgeries following implantation is beneficial compared with traditional growing rod systems.
Subject(s)
Internal Fixators , Magnets , Orthopedic Procedures/instrumentation , Scoliosis/surgery , Child , Child, Preschool , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Male , Orthopedic Procedures/methods , Postoperative Complications , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
As part of the national initiative to reduce waiting times for joint replacement surgery in Wales, the Cardiff and Vale NHS Trust referred 224 patients to the NHS Treatment Centre in Weston-Super-Mare for total knee replacement (TKR). A total of 258 Kinemax TKRs were performed between November 2004 and August 2006. Of these, a total of 199 patients (232 TKRs, 90%) have been followed up for five years. This cohort was compared with 258 consecutive TKRs in 250 patients, performed at Cardiff and Vale Orthopaedic Centre (CAVOC) over a similar time period. The five year cumulative survival rate was 80.6% (95% confidence interval (CI) 74.0 to 86.0) in the Weston-Super-Mare cohort and 95.0% (95% CI 90.2 to 98.2) in the CAVOC cohort with revision for any reason as the endpoint. The relative risk for revision at Weston-Super-Mare compared with CAVOC was 3.88 (p < 0.001). For implants surviving five years, the mean Oxford knee scores (OKS) and mean EuroQol (EQ-5D) scores were similar (OKS: Weston-Super-Mare 29 (2 to 47) vs CAVOC 29.8 (3 to 48), p = 0.61; EQ-5D: Weston-Super-Mare 0.53 (-0.38 to 1.00) vs CAVOC 0.55 (-0.32 to 1.00), p = 0.79). Patients with revised TKRs had significantly lower Oxford knee and EQ-5D scores (p < 0.001). The results show a higher revision rate for patients operated at Weston-Super-Mare Treatment Centre, with a reduction in functional outcome and quality of life after revision. This further confirms that patients moved from one area to another for joint replacement surgery fare poorly.
