The primary aim of this study is to investigate the limited efficacy of these innovative surgical solutions in treatment of Early Onset Scoliosis (EOS) in terms of maintaining reduction while maintaining spinal growth. The secondary aim is to compare both devices for these and other parameters as well as safety.
Rationale: EOS is a severe and potentially life-threatening disorder since a disturbance of spinal development leads to impaired development of the trunk, with cardio-respiratory failure as a result, often early in adult life. Several innovative solutions have been developed to treat growing children with severe EOS. The SDS device was developed internally at the dpt. of orthopedics at the UMC Utrecht, the Netherlands, the MID-C device was developed by the company ApiFix Ltd. Objective: The primary aim of this study is to investigate the limited efficacy of these innovative surgical solutions in treatment of early onset scoliosis in terms of maintaining reduction while maintaining spinal growth. The secondary aim is to compare both devices for these and other parameters as well as safety. Study design: A feasibility study using two prospective cohorts according to an open label randomized clinical trial (RCT) design. The study will be done in two tertiary referral centers (UMC Utrecht and Amsterdam UMC). Primary endpoints are maintenance of curve correction as well as complications. These data will be compared to a recently described cohort of patients that received a "standard treatment" (Magnetically controlled growing rod (MCGR)). The same endpoints as well as secondary outcomes, will be compared between the two new treatments. Study population: Children with idiopathic(-like) early onset scoliosis with an indication for a growing rod implant.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE
Amsterdam UMC
Amsterdam, North Holland, Netherlands
UMC Utrecht
Utrecht, Netherlands
Limited-efficacy of SDS and MID-C in terms of curve correction maintenance: changes in cobb angle
changes in cobb angle on radiographs post-op and at 4 weeks, 3 months and 12 months follow-up (FU). A maximum of 5 degrees increase will be the threshold to define maintenance.
Time frame: Until 1 year post-operative FU
Incidence of Treatment-Emergent Serious Adverse Events of SDS and MID-C
Reported treatment related Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) per-operatively and at 4 weeks, 3 months and 12 months FU.
Time frame: Until 1 year post-operative FU
Limited-efficacy of SDS and MID-C in terms of spinal length
Changes in length of T1-T12, T1-S1 and the instrumented segment in mm on calibrated Anterior Posterior (AP) X-rays post-op and at 4 weeks, 3 months and 12 months FU.
Time frame: Until 1 year post-operative FU
SDS vs. MID-C with respect to limited-efficacy in terms of curve correction maintenance
changes in cobb angle on radiographs post-op and at 4 weeks, 3 months and 12 months FU. A maximum of 5 degrees increase will be the threshold to define maintenance.
Time frame: Until 1 year post-operative FU
SDS vs. MID-C with respect to limited-efficacy in terms of spinal length
Changes in length of T1-T12, T1-S1 and the instrumented segment in mm on calibrated AP X-rays post-op and at 4 weeks, 3 months and 12 months FU.
Time frame: Until 1 year post-operative FU
SDS vs. MID-C with respect to the incidence of Treatment-Emergent Serious Adverse Events
Reported treatment related SAEs per-operatively and at 4 weeks, 3 months and 12 months FU.
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.
Time frame: Until 1 year post-operative FU
SDS vs. MID-C with respect to surgery time
Surgery time in minutes
Time frame: Until 1 year post-operative FU
SDS vs. MID-C with respect to blood loss during surgery
blood loss in cc
Time frame: Until 1 year post-operative FU
SDS vs. MID-C with respect to length of hospital stay
length of hospital stay in days
Time frame: Until 1 year post-operative FU
SDS vs. MID-C with respect to recovery time
recovery time in minutes
Time frame: Until 1 year post-operative FU
SDS vs. MID-C with respect to bone density
Bone density changes of the bypassed vertebrae on Dual Energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DEXA)scan post-op and at 3 months en 12 months FU.
Time frame: Until 1 year post-operative FU
SDS vs. MID-C with respect to Quality Of Life (QOL) on the Early Onset Scoliosis Questionnaires (EOSQ-24)
Parent reported QOL and performance is assessed with the 24-item Early Onset Scoliosis Questionnaires (EOSQ-24) pre-op and at 4 weeks, 3 months and 12 months FU. EOSQ-24 covers the following domains: Child's Health Related Quality of Life (16 items), Family Impact (2 items) and Satisfaction (2 items).
Time frame: Until 1 year post-operative FU
SDS vs. MID-C with respect to flexibility of the spine
Flexibility and 3D rotation of the spine on dynamic echography (Scolioscan)
Time frame: Until 1 year post-operative FU
SDS vs. MID-C with respect to 3D development of the spine
Apical Vertebral Rotation based on MRI
Time frame: Until 1 year post-operative FU
SDS vs. MID-C with respect to patient appearance
sagittal balance on clinical photographs post-op and at 1 year FU
Time frame: Until 1 year post-operative FU