Cargando…

The Performance of MAGEC X Spine Rods: A Comparative Retrieval Study

STUDY DESIGN: Multicentre comparative analysis of explanted Spine Magnetically Controlled Growing Rods (MCGRs). OBJECTIVES: MAGEC X, the latest commercially available generation, was recalled in 2020 due to the risk of post-implantation separation of an actuator end-cap component. Currently, the sup...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tognini, Martina, Hothi, Harry, Bergiers, Sean, Shafafy, Masood, Tucker, Stewart, Broomfield, Edel, Henckel, Johann, Hart, Alister
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10676182/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35446173
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/21925682221096340
_version_ 1785141229842857984
author Tognini, Martina
Hothi, Harry
Bergiers, Sean
Shafafy, Masood
Tucker, Stewart
Broomfield, Edel
Henckel, Johann
Hart, Alister
author_facet Tognini, Martina
Hothi, Harry
Bergiers, Sean
Shafafy, Masood
Tucker, Stewart
Broomfield, Edel
Henckel, Johann
Hart, Alister
author_sort Tognini, Martina
collection PubMed
description STUDY DESIGN: Multicentre comparative analysis of explanted Spine Magnetically Controlled Growing Rods (MCGRs). OBJECTIVES: MAGEC X, the latest commercially available generation, was recalled in 2020 due to the risk of post-implantation separation of an actuator end-cap component. Currently, the supply of all MAGEC rods was temporarily suspended in the UK and the EU. Objective of this study is to compare the performance of the MAGEC X MCGR to the earlier MAGEC 1.3 design iteration, by means of retrieval analysis. METHODS: Fifteen of both MAGEC X and MAGEC 1.3 rods were consecutively collected from five different hospitals following removal surgery and matched by time to removal. Clinical and implant data was collected for all MCGRs. Analysis comprised visual assessments of external damage, plain radiograph evaluations, force and elongation testing, MAGEC X end-cap torque testing and disassembly. Mann-Whitney U tests were used to statistically compare groups. RESULTS: Rod distraction reached in vivo was significantly higher in the MAGEC 1.3 (P = .002). There was no statistically significant difference in the total external damage score (P = .870), maximum force produced (P = .695) or distraction reached during force test (P = .880). No pin fracture was detected. Elongation of stroke was mildly higher (P = .051) for the MAGEC X implants. One MAGEC X had evident end cap component loosening. Internal damage scores were mildly lower in the MAGEC X group. CONCLUSION: MAGEC X showed similar performance results than the previous design iteration MAGEC 1.3. End-cap component loosening was observed, with no major consequences on the internal mechanism.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10676182
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-106761822022-04-21 The Performance of MAGEC X Spine Rods: A Comparative Retrieval Study Tognini, Martina Hothi, Harry Bergiers, Sean Shafafy, Masood Tucker, Stewart Broomfield, Edel Henckel, Johann Hart, Alister Global Spine J Original Articles STUDY DESIGN: Multicentre comparative analysis of explanted Spine Magnetically Controlled Growing Rods (MCGRs). OBJECTIVES: MAGEC X, the latest commercially available generation, was recalled in 2020 due to the risk of post-implantation separation of an actuator end-cap component. Currently, the supply of all MAGEC rods was temporarily suspended in the UK and the EU. Objective of this study is to compare the performance of the MAGEC X MCGR to the earlier MAGEC 1.3 design iteration, by means of retrieval analysis. METHODS: Fifteen of both MAGEC X and MAGEC 1.3 rods were consecutively collected from five different hospitals following removal surgery and matched by time to removal. Clinical and implant data was collected for all MCGRs. Analysis comprised visual assessments of external damage, plain radiograph evaluations, force and elongation testing, MAGEC X end-cap torque testing and disassembly. Mann-Whitney U tests were used to statistically compare groups. RESULTS: Rod distraction reached in vivo was significantly higher in the MAGEC 1.3 (P = .002). There was no statistically significant difference in the total external damage score (P = .870), maximum force produced (P = .695) or distraction reached during force test (P = .880). No pin fracture was detected. Elongation of stroke was mildly higher (P = .051) for the MAGEC X implants. One MAGEC X had evident end cap component loosening. Internal damage scores were mildly lower in the MAGEC X group. CONCLUSION: MAGEC X showed similar performance results than the previous design iteration MAGEC 1.3. End-cap component loosening was observed, with no major consequences on the internal mechanism. SAGE Publications 2022-04-21 2024-01 /pmc/articles/PMC10676182/ /pubmed/35446173 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/21925682221096340 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work as published without adaptation or alteration, without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Original Articles
Tognini, Martina
Hothi, Harry
Bergiers, Sean
Shafafy, Masood
Tucker, Stewart
Broomfield, Edel
Henckel, Johann
Hart, Alister
The Performance of MAGEC X Spine Rods: A Comparative Retrieval Study
title The Performance of MAGEC X Spine Rods: A Comparative Retrieval Study
title_full The Performance of MAGEC X Spine Rods: A Comparative Retrieval Study
title_fullStr The Performance of MAGEC X Spine Rods: A Comparative Retrieval Study
title_full_unstemmed The Performance of MAGEC X Spine Rods: A Comparative Retrieval Study
title_short The Performance of MAGEC X Spine Rods: A Comparative Retrieval Study
title_sort performance of magec x spine rods: a comparative retrieval study
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10676182/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35446173
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/21925682221096340
work_keys_str_mv AT togninimartina theperformanceofmagecxspinerodsacomparativeretrievalstudy
AT hothiharry theperformanceofmagecxspinerodsacomparativeretrievalstudy
AT bergierssean theperformanceofmagecxspinerodsacomparativeretrievalstudy
AT shafafymasood theperformanceofmagecxspinerodsacomparativeretrievalstudy
AT tuckerstewart theperformanceofmagecxspinerodsacomparativeretrievalstudy
AT broomfieldedel theperformanceofmagecxspinerodsacomparativeretrievalstudy
AT henckeljohann theperformanceofmagecxspinerodsacomparativeretrievalstudy
AT hartalister theperformanceofmagecxspinerodsacomparativeretrievalstudy
AT togninimartina performanceofmagecxspinerodsacomparativeretrievalstudy
AT hothiharry performanceofmagecxspinerodsacomparativeretrievalstudy
AT bergierssean performanceofmagecxspinerodsacomparativeretrievalstudy
AT shafafymasood performanceofmagecxspinerodsacomparativeretrievalstudy
AT tuckerstewart performanceofmagecxspinerodsacomparativeretrievalstudy
AT broomfieldedel performanceofmagecxspinerodsacomparativeretrievalstudy
AT henckeljohann performanceofmagecxspinerodsacomparativeretrievalstudy
AT hartalister performanceofmagecxspinerodsacomparativeretrievalstudy