Surgical treatment of osteogenesis imperfecta: a summary of the incidence of femoral implant-related complications in children with Sillence type I, III and IV

PURPOSE

This study explored the incidence of IRCs used in the procedures of the femur in children with osteogenesis imperfecta (OI) and investigated the independent risk factors of IRCs.

METHODS

Three hundred eight-eight cases of surgical data about children with OI were included, who were treated with plate, elastic nail, Kirschner wire and telescopic rod. The choice of different procedures depended on the age of children, the status of femur and the availability of devices. Patient demographics and major IRCs were recorded to compare the outcomes of the four procedures. Then, Cox proportional hazard regression was used to analyse the independent risk factors of IRC, and subgroup analysis was applied to further verify the above results.

RESULTS

The total incidence of IRC in the four groups was 90.1% (191/212) for plate, 96.8% (30/31) for Kirschner wire, 87.7% (57/65) for elastic nail and 30.0% (24/80) for telescopic rod. The incidence of IRC in the telescopic rod was lower than that in plate, elastic nail and Kirschner wire (P < 0.001). Cox proportional hazard regression analysis confirmed that procedure was the independent risk factor of IRC (HR, 0.191; 95% CI, 0.126-0.288; P < 0.001), fracture (HR, 0.193; 95% CI, 0.109-0.344; P < 0.001) and deformity (HR, 0.086; 95% CI, 0.027-0.272; P < 0.001). In addition, age of surgery was the independent risk factor of fracture (HR, 0.916; 95% CI, 0.882-0.952; P < 0.001) and deformity (HR, 1.052; 95% CI, 1.008-1.098; P = 0.019). Subgroup analysis confirmed that age of surgery, gender, classification, preoperative state and angle did not affect the effect of telescopic rod on reducing the risk of IRCs.

CONCLUSIONS

In our cohort, lower incidence of IRCs was observed in telescopic rod group compared with plate, Kirschner wire and elastic nail. Procedure and age of surgery were independent risk factors of fracture. Likewise, procedure and age of surgery were independent risk factors of deformity, and procedure was independent risk factors of IRC.

A clinical and radiological matched-pair analysis of patients treated with the PRECICE and STRYDE magnetically driven motorized intramedullary lengthening nails

AIMS

Distraction osteogenesis with intramedullary lengthening devices has undergone rapid development in the past decade with implant enhancement. In this first single-centre matched-pair analysis we focus on the comparison of treatment with the PRECICE and STRYDE intramedullary lengthening devices and aim to clarify any clinical and radiological differences.

METHODS

A single-centre 2:1 matched-pair retrospective analysis of 42 patients treated with the STRYDE and 82 patients treated with the PRECICE nail between May 2013 and November 2020 was conducted. Clinical and lengthening parameters were compared while focusing radiological assessment on osseous alterations related to the nail's telescopic junction and locking bolts at four different stages.

RESULTS

Osteolysis next to the telescopic junction was observed in 31/48 segments (65%) lengthened with the STRYDE nail before implant removal compared to 1/91 segment (1%) in the PRECICE cohort. In the STRYDE cohort, osteolysis initially increased, but decreased or resolved in almost all lengthened segments (86%) after implant removal. Implant failure was observed in 9/48 STRYDE (19%) and in 8/92 PRECICE nails (9%). Breakage of the distal locking bolts was found in 5/48 STRYDE nails (10%) compared to none in the PRECICE cohort. Treatment-associated pain was generally recorded as mild and found in 30/48 patients (63%) and 39/92 (42%) in the STRYDE and PRECICE cohorts, respectively. Temporary range of motion (ROM) limitations under distraction were registered in 17/48 (35%) segments treated with the STRYDE and 35/92 segments (38%) treated with the PRECICE nail.

CONCLUSION

Osteolysis and periosteal reaction, implant breakage, and pain during lengthening and consolidation is more likely in patients treated with the STRYDE nail compared to the PRECICE nail. Temporary ROM limitations during lengthening occurred independent of the applied device. Implant-related osseous alterations seem to remodel after implant removal.Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(1):88-96.

Revision Surgery for a Rod Fracture with Multirod Constructs Using a Posterior-Only Approach Following Surgery for Adult Spinal Deformity

Study Design

Single-center retrospective case series.

Purpose

We aimed to evaluate the clinical results of revision surgery for a rod fracture using a posterior-only approach and determine the best procedure to prevent refracture in patients with adult spinal deformity (ASD).

Overview of Literature

ASD affects the thoracolumbar spine and often requires surgical correction. However, surgery for extensive spinal fusion causes rod fracture, a major mechanical complication. Few studies have described the treatment methods for rod fractures. Furthermore, the clinical outcomes of revision surgery for rod fractures in patients with ASD are currently unclear.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 404 patients who underwent corrective fusion surgery for ASD with a minimum 2-year follow-up. We studied cases of reoperation for postoperative rod fractures and investigated surgical procedure, intraoperative findings, clinical course, and rod refracture following revision surgery.

Results

Rod fracture was observed in 88 patients (21.8%). Fifty-three patients (average age, 68.3 years; average blood loss, 502.2 mL [% estimated blood volume=16.4%]; and operation time, 203.3 minutes) who suffered from a rod fracture at an average of 28.3 months after the primary operation underwent reoperation. Surgical invasiveness had no significant differences in total or partial rod replacement; however, the procedures with and without an anterior bone graft significantly differed. The replaced rod refractured at an average of 35.3 months after the revision surgery of five patients. The rod also refractured at a level outside multiple rods in two patients and with traumatic episodes in three patients. Three patients had bone grafts in the anterior column.

Conclusions

Revision surgery involving a multirod with a posterior-only approach for a rod fracture that occurred after ASD was performed successfully. Bone grafting in the anterior column is unnecessary for patients without massive bone defects.

A comparison of the post-fusion outcome of patients with early-onset scoliosis treated with traditional and magnetically controlled growing rods

AIMS

The aim of this study was to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of patients with early-onset scoliosis (EOS), who had undergone spinal fusion after distraction-based spinal growth modulation using either traditional growing rods (TGRs) or magnetically controlled growing rods (MCGRs).

METHODS

We undertook a retrospective review of skeletally mature patients who had undergone fusion for an EOS, which had been previously treated using either TGRs or MCGRs. Measured outcomes included sequential coronal T1 to S1 height and major curve (Cobb) angle on plain radiographs and any complications requiring unplanned surgery before final fusion.

RESULTS

We reviewed 43 patients (63% female) with a mean age of 6.4 years (SD 2.6) at the index procedure, and 12.2 years (SD 2.2) at final fusion. Their mean follow-up was 8.1 years (SD 3.4). A total of 16 patients were treated with MCGRs and 27 with TGRs. The mean number of distractions was 7.5 in the MCGR group and ten in the TGR group (p = 0.471). The mean interval between distractions was 3.4 months in the MCGR group and 8.6 months in the TGR group (p < 0.001). The mean Cobb angle had improved by 25.1° in the MCGR group and 23.2° in TGR group (p = 0.664) at final follow-up. The mean coronal T1 to S1 height had increased by 16% in the MCGR group and 32.9% in TGR group (p = 0.001), although the mean T1 to S1 height achieved at final follow-up was similar in both. Unplanned operations were needed in 43.8% of the MCGR group and 51.2% of TGR group (p = 0.422).

CONCLUSION

In this retrospective, single-centre review, there were no significant differences in major curve correction or gain in spinal height at fusion. Although the number of planned procedures were fewer in patients with MCGRs, the rates of implant-related complications needing unplanned revision surgery were similar in the two groups. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(2):257-264.