TY - JOUR
T1 - Distraction forces on the spine in early-onset scoliosis
T2 - A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical and biomechanical literature
AU - Lemans, Justin V.C.
AU - Wijdicks, Sebastiaan P.J.
AU - Koutsoliakos, Ioannis
AU - Hekman, Edsko E.G.
AU - Agarwal, Aakash
AU - Castelein, René M.
AU - Kruyt, Moyo C.
N1 - Funding Information:
None. The authors and/or their institutions did not receive financial support for this study. No ethical review was deemed necessary for this systematic review and meta-analysis. The manuscript and/or its contents have not been published elsewhere and are currently not under consideration by another journal. All authors declare that they:, 1) Made substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data; or the creation of new software used in the work;, 2) Drafted the work or revised it critically for important intellectual content;, 3) Approved the version to be published; and. 4) Agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 The Author(s)
PY - 2021/7/19
Y1 - 2021/7/19
N2 - Distraction-based growing rods are frequently used to treat Early-Onset Scoliosis. These use intermittent spinal distractions to maintain correction and allow for growth. It is unknown how much spinal distraction can be applied safely. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical and biomechanical literature to identify such safety limits for the pediatric spine. This systematic review and meta-analysis was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Three systematic searches were performed including in-vivo, ex-vivo and in-silico literature. Study quality was assessed in all studies and data including patient- or specimen characteristics, distraction magnitude and spinal failure location and ultimate force at failure were collected. Twelve studies were included, 6 in-vivo, 4 ex-vivo and 2 in-silico studies. Mean in-vivo distraction forces ranged between 242 and 621 N with maxima of 422–981 N, without structural failures when using pedicle screw constructs. In the ex-vivo studies (only cervical spines), segment C0-C2 was strongest, with decreasing strength in more distal segments. Meta-regression analysis demonstrated that ultimate force at birth is 300–350 N, which increases approximately 100 N each year until adulthood. Ex-vivo and in-silico studies showed that yielding occurs at 70–90% of ultimate force, failure starts at the junction between endplate and intervertebral disc, after which the posterior- and anterior long ligament rupture. While data on safety of distraction forces is limited, this systematic review and meta-analysis may aid in the development of guidelines on spinal distraction and may benefit the development and optimization of contemporary and future distraction-based technologies.
AB - Distraction-based growing rods are frequently used to treat Early-Onset Scoliosis. These use intermittent spinal distractions to maintain correction and allow for growth. It is unknown how much spinal distraction can be applied safely. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical and biomechanical literature to identify such safety limits for the pediatric spine. This systematic review and meta-analysis was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Three systematic searches were performed including in-vivo, ex-vivo and in-silico literature. Study quality was assessed in all studies and data including patient- or specimen characteristics, distraction magnitude and spinal failure location and ultimate force at failure were collected. Twelve studies were included, 6 in-vivo, 4 ex-vivo and 2 in-silico studies. Mean in-vivo distraction forces ranged between 242 and 621 N with maxima of 422–981 N, without structural failures when using pedicle screw constructs. In the ex-vivo studies (only cervical spines), segment C0-C2 was strongest, with decreasing strength in more distal segments. Meta-regression analysis demonstrated that ultimate force at birth is 300–350 N, which increases approximately 100 N each year until adulthood. Ex-vivo and in-silico studies showed that yielding occurs at 70–90% of ultimate force, failure starts at the junction between endplate and intervertebral disc, after which the posterior- and anterior long ligament rupture. While data on safety of distraction forces is limited, this systematic review and meta-analysis may aid in the development of guidelines on spinal distraction and may benefit the development and optimization of contemporary and future distraction-based technologies.
KW - Biomechanics
KW - Distraction
KW - Early-onset scoliosis
KW - Growing rods
KW - Safety
KW - Spine
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85108441779&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2021.110571
DO - 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2021.110571
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85108441779
VL - 124
JO - Journal of biomechanics
JF - Journal of biomechanics
SN - 0021-9290
M1 - 110571
ER -