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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |