PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
September 14, 2025Spine Deformity2 citationsOpen Access

Application value of halo‑pelvic traction in the treatment of severe rigid spinal deformity.

View Full Paper
CLChanglin LvZZZiang ZhangXDXuanyu Dong

Key Points

  • Halo-pelvic traction showed greater angular correction compared to halo-gravity traction, with statistically significant results.
  • The halo-gravity traction group experienced longer surgery durations and greater intraoperative blood loss with less improvement in pulmonary function.
  • Both treatment options were found to be feasible and safe without neurological complications, indicating potential for clinical use.
  • Health-related quality of life improvements, measured by SRS-22 scores, were observed in both groups, but not statistically different.

Abstract

Comparison of the clinical outcomes of halo-gravity traction (HGT) and halo-pelvic traction (HPT) was performed in the treatment of patients with severe rigid spinal deformity, with the aim of elucidating the clinical value of HGT and HPT in managing such deformities and providing evidence-based recommendations for surgical treatment planning. A retrospective study was conducted of 20 patients treated at two large tertiary hospitals (2019-2022). All underwent posterior osteotomy correction and were categorized into HGT (n = 14) and HPT (n = 6) groups. Key parameters analyzed included radiographic measures (Cobb angles), pulmonary function tests (before and after traction/surgery), and intraoperative metrics such as blood loss, surgery duration, and osteotomy grade. Health-related quality of life was evaluated using the SRS-22 questionnaire. Baseline characteristics were comparable between groups. Compared to the HPT group, the HGT group showed significantly lower correction rates in both coronal and sagittal Cobb angles (P < 0.01), longer surgical duration, greater intraoperative blood loss, and higher osteotomy grade (P < 0.05). Improvements in FVC% and FEV1% were significantly smaller in the HGT group (P < 0.001). While both groups showed postoperative gains in SRS-22r scores, the differences between them were not statistically significant. No neurological complications occurred in either group; one case of iliac pin breakage in the HPT group was managed successfully without impacting the surgical outcome. Both HGT and HPT were feasible and safe in the preoperative management of patients with severe rigid spinal deformity. In this limited cohort, HPT was associated with greater angular correction, improved pulmonary function, and reduced intraoperative complexity compared to HGT. While these findings are encouraging, larger prospective studies are warranted to validate the long-term efficacy and safety of HPT and to better inform clinical decision-making in high-risk spinal deformity cases.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Lv et al. (2025) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/68d44f7b31b076d99fa56cf7https://doi.org/10.1007/s43390-025-01184-y
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper