Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
European Spine Journal
Published in: European Spine Journal 10/2008

01-10-2008 | Original Article

A novel fusionless vertebral physeal device inducing spinal growth modulation for the correction of spinal deformities

Authors: Eliane C. Schmid, Carl-Eric Aubin, Alain Moreau, John Sarwark, Stefan Parent

Published in: European Spine Journal | Issue 10/2008

Login to get access

Abstract

Current fusionless scoliosis surgical techniques span the intervertebral disc. This alters the spine stiffness, disc pressure equilibrium and possibly may lead to disc degeneration. A new fusionless physeal device was developed that locally modulates vertebral growth by compressing the physeal ring, while maintaining maximum segmental spinal mobility without spanning the intervertebral disc. This study’s objective was to test the feasibility of the device on a small animal model by inducing a scoliotic deformity (inverse approach) while analyzing the growth modifications. This study was conducted on caudal vertebrae of 21 rats (26-day-old) divided into 3 groups: (1) “experimental” (n = 11) with 4 instrumented vertebrae, (2) sham (n = 5) and (3) control (n = 5). Radiographs were taken at regular intervals during the 7-week experimental period. Tissues were embedded in methyl metacrylate (MMA), prepared by the cutting/grinding method, and then stained (Toluidine blue). The discs physiological alterations were qualitatively assessed and classified by inspection of the histological sections. A mean maximum Cobb angle of 30º (±6º) and a mean maximum vertebral wedge angle of 10º (±3º) were obtained between the 23rd and 35th day postoperative in the subgroup that underwent a long-term response from the device. The sham group underwent no growth alterations when compared to the control group. Descriptive histological analyses of the operated segments showed that 69% had no alterations to the intervertebral disc. This study presents experimental evidence that the device induces a significant and controlled wedging of the vertebrae while maintaining regular flexibility. In most discs, there were no visible morphological alterations induced. Further analysis of the discs and testing of this device on a larger animal is recommended with the long-term objective of developing an early treatment of progressive idiopathic scoliosis.
Literature
1.
Akyuz E, Braun JT, Brown NAT et al (2006) Static versus dynamic loading in the mechanical modulation of vertebral growth. Spine 31(25):E952–E958PubMedCrossRef
2.
Alvarez J, Balbin M, Santos F et al (2000) Different bone growth rates are associated with changes in the expression pattern of types II and X collagens and collagenase 3 in proximal growth plates of the rat tibia. J Bone Miner Res 15(1):82–94PubMedCrossRef
3.
Betz RR, D’Andrea LP, Mulcahey MJ et al (2005) Vertebral body stapling procedure for the treatment of scoliosis in the growing child. Clin Orthop Relat Res 434:55–60PubMedCrossRef
4.
Betz RR, Kim J, D’Andrea LP et al (2003) An innovative technique of vertebral body stapling for the treatment of patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a feasibility, safety and utility study. Spine 28:S255–S265PubMedCrossRef
5.
Braun JT, Akyuz E, Udall H et al (2006) Three-dimensional analysis of two fusionless scoliosis treatments: a flexible ligament tether versus a rigid-shape memory alloy staple. Spine 31(3):262–268PubMedCrossRef
6.
Braun JT, Ogilvie JW, Akyuz E et al (2006) Creation of an experimental idiopathic-type scoliosis in an immature goat model using a flexible posterior asymmetric tether. Spine 31(13):1410–1414PubMedCrossRef
7.
Grunhagen T, Wilde G, Soukane DM et al (2006) Nutrient supply and intervertebral disc metabolism. J Bone Joint Surg Am 88:30–35PubMedCrossRef
8.
Hunt K, Braun J, Christensen B (2007) The effect of two clinically relevant fusionless scoliosis implant strategies on the health of the intervertebral disc. In: SRS 42nd Annual Meeting. Edinburg, Scotland
9.
Hunziker EB, Schenk RK (1989) Physiological mechanisms adopted by chondrocye regulating longitudinal bone growth in rats. J Physiol 414:55–71PubMed
10.
Kaapa E et al (1994) Collagens in the injured porcine intervertebral disc. J Othop Res 12:93–102CrossRef
11.
Mente PL, Stokes IAF, Spence H et al (1997) Progression of vertebral wedging in an asymmetrically loaded rat tail model. Spine 22:1292–1296PubMedCrossRef
12.
Moreau A, Wang DS, Forget S et al (2004) Melatonin signaling dysfunction in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 29(16):1772–1781PubMedCrossRef
13.
Osti OL, Vernon-Roberts B, Fraser RD (1990) Annulus tears and intervertebral disc degeneration. An experimental study using an animal model. Spine 15(8):762–767PubMedCrossRef
14.
Sarwark J, Aubin CE (2007) Growth considerations of the immature spine. J Bone Joint Surg 89:8–13PubMedCrossRef
15.
Stokes IAF, Gwadera J, Dimock A et al (2005) Modulation of vertebral and tibial growth by compression loading: diurnal versus full-time loading. J Orthopaed Res 23:188–195CrossRef
16.
Stokes IAF, Spence H, Aronsson DD et al (1996) Mechnical modulation of vertebral body growth: implications for scoliosis progression. Spine 21:1161–1167
17.
Stokes IA et al (2006) Intervertebral disc adaptation to wedging deformation. Stud Health Technol Inform 123:182–187PubMed
18.
Wall EJ, Bylski-Austrow DI, Kolata RJ et al (2005) Endoscopic mechanical spinal hemiepiphysiodesis modifies spine growth. Spine 30(10):1148–1153
Metadata
Title
A novel fusionless vertebral physeal device inducing spinal growth modulation for the correction of spinal deformities
Authors
Eliane C. Schmid
Carl-Eric Aubin
Alain Moreau
John Sarwark
Stefan Parent
Publication date
01-10-2008
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
European Spine Journal / Issue 10/2008
Print ISSN: 0940-6719
Electronic ISSN: 1432-0932
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-008-0723-9

Other articles of this Issue 10/2008

European Spine Journal 10/2008 Go to the issue

Reviewer's Comment

ESJ: expert comment on number and cost of claims linked to minor cervical trauma (manuscript number: ESJO-D-07-00195R1, B. Soltermann et al.)

Announcements

Announcements

Original Article

Does abdominal obesity cause increase in the amount of epidural fat?

Original Article

MRI follow-up of subchondral signal abnormalities in a selected group of chronic low back pain patients

Original Article

Posterior fusion only for thoracic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis of more than 80°: pedicle screws versus hybrid instrumentation

Letter to the Editor

Letter to the editor concerning “Independent evaluation of a clinical prediction rule for spinal manipulative therapy: a randomised controlled trial” (M. Hancock et al.)