Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 30, 2026
Cell-based Assay Protocol for the Prognostic Prediction of Idiopathic Scoliosis Using Cellular Dielectric Spectroscopy
Published on: October 16, 2013
No Benefits in Using Magnetically Controlled Growing Rod as Temporary Internal Distraction Device in Staged Surgical
Pawel Grabala1,2, Kelly Chamberlin3, Michal Grabala4
1Department of Pediatric Orthopedic Surgery and Traumatology, University Children's Hospital, Waszyngtona 17, 15-274 Bialystok, Poland.
Background:
Severe spinal curvatures (SSCs) in children and adolescents have long been treated with preoperative Halo traction, in its various variations. There are also several radical techniques available for the management of neglected SSCs, such as osteotomies; however, these can be risky. Comparing the treatment outcomes when using preoperative Halo Gravity Traction (HGT) against the use of a Magnetically Controlled Growing Rod (MCGR) as a temporary internal distraction (TID) device, we evaluated the differences in surgical and radiological outcomes.
Methods:
We conducted a retrospective study of 30 patients with SSCs, treated with HGT followed by posterior spinal fusion (PSF; Group 1, n = 18) or treated using a temporary MCGR as a TID followed by PSF (Group 2, n = 12). All patients underwent surgical treatment between 2016 and 2022. The inclusion criteria were SSC > 90°, flexibility < 30%, and the use of preoperative HGT followed by PSF or the two-stage surgical procedure with initial TID rod placement (Stage 1) followed by PSF (Stage 2). The evaluated parameters were as follows: rib hump, trunk height, and radiographic outcomes. All parameters were collected preoperatively, after the initial surgery, after final correction and fusion, and during the final follow-up.
Results:
In Group 1, we evaluated 18 patients with a mean age of 15.5 years; in Group 2, we evaluated 12 patients with a mean age of 14.2 years. The interval between the staged procedures averaged 32.7 days. The mean preoperative main curves (MC) were 118° and 112° in Group 1 and Group 2, respectively. After definitive surgery, the MC was corrected to 42° and 44° in G1 and G2, respectively. The mean percentage correction of the MC was similar in both groups (65% vs. 61% in G1 and G2, respectively). The mean preoperative thoracic kyphosis was 92.5° in G1 and 98° in G2, corrected to 43.8° in G1 and 38.8° in G2. Trunk height increased by 9 cm on average.
Conclusions:
There are no benefits in using a MCGR as a temporary internal distraction device in the management of neglected scoliosis in adolescents. Surgical treatment of severe scoliosis may be safe, with a reduced risk of potential complications, when using preoperative HGT. A specific intraoperative complication when using a MCGR as a temporary internal distraction device was a 50% risk of transient neuromonitoring changes, due to significant force applied to the spine and radical distraction of the spine. We achieved similar clinical, radiographic, and pulmonary function outcomes for both techniques. The use of HGT causes less blood loss with a shorter overall time under anesthesia. Partial correction significantly aids the subsequent operation by facilitating a gradual reduction in the curvature, thereby reducing the difficulty of surgical treatment and the risk of neurological deficits.
