Comparison of surgical interventions for the treatment of early-onset scoliosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

OBJECTIVE Several growth-preserving surgical techniques are employed in the management of early-onset scoliosis (EOS). The authors’ objective was to compare the use of traditional growing rods (TGRs), magnetically controlled growing rods (MCGRs), Shilla growth guidance techniques, and vertically expanding prosthetic titanium ribs (VEPTRs) for the management of EOS. METHODS A systematic review of electronic databases, including Ovid MEDLINE and Cochrane, was performed. Outcomes of interest included correction of Cobb angle, T1–S1 distance, and complication rate, including alignment, hardware failure and infection, and planned and unplanned reoperation rates. The percent changes and 95% CIs were pooled across studies using random-effects meta-analysis. RESULTS A total of 67 studies were identified, which included 2021 patients. Of these, 1169 (57.8%) patients underwent operations with TGR, 178 (8.8%) Shilla growth guidance system, 448 (22.2%) MCGR, and 226 (11.1%) VEPTR system. The mean ± SD age of the cohort was 6.9 ± 1.2 years. The authors found that the Shilla technique provided the most significant improvement in coronal Cobb angle immediately after surgery (mean [95% CI] 64.3% [61.4%–67.2%]), whereas VEPTR (27.6% [22.7%–33.6%]) performed significantly worse. VEPTR also performed significantly worse than the other techniques at final follow-up. The techniques also provided comparable gains in T1–S1 height immediately postoperatively (mean [95% CI] 10.7% [8.4%–13.0%]); however, TGR performed better at final follow-up (21.4% [18.7%–24.1%]). Complications were not significantly different among the patients who underwent the Shilla, TGR, MCGR, and VEPTR techniques, except for the rate of infections. The TGR technique had the lowest rate of unplanned reoperations (mean [95% CI] 15% [10%–23%] vs 24% [19%–29%]) but the highest number of planned reoperations per patient (5.31 [4.83–5.82]). The overall certainty was also low, with a high risk of bias across studies. CONCLUSIONS This analysis suggested that the Shilla technique was associated with a greater early coronal Cobb angle correction, whereas use of VEPTR was associated with a lower correction rate at any time point. TGR offered the most significant height gain at final follow-up. The complication rates were comparable across all surgical techniques. The optimal surgical approach should be tailored to individual patients, taking into consideration the strengths and limitations of each option.