Effectiveness and Safety of Preoperative Halo Gravity Traction-Assisted Posterior Spinal Fusion Surgery for Severe and Rigid Scoliosis: A Comparative Matched-Cohort Study

Background. Severe and rigid scoliosis poses significant challenges in surgical correction, and innovative approaches are continually sought to enhance effectiveness and ensure patient safety. Halo-gravity traction (HGT) continues to be a vital tool in managing severe spinal conditions, offering a n...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Yangpu Zhang, Bo Han, Jianqiang Wang, Yuzeng Liu, Yiqi Zhang, Yong Hai, Lijin Zhou
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2024-01-01
Series:International Journal of Clinical Practice
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2024/6899125
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1832548309286256640
author Yangpu Zhang
Bo Han
Jianqiang Wang
Yuzeng Liu
Yiqi Zhang
Yong Hai
Lijin Zhou
author_facet Yangpu Zhang
Bo Han
Jianqiang Wang
Yuzeng Liu
Yiqi Zhang
Yong Hai
Lijin Zhou
author_sort Yangpu Zhang
collection DOAJ
description Background. Severe and rigid scoliosis poses significant challenges in surgical correction, and innovative approaches are continually sought to enhance effectiveness and ensure patient safety. Halo-gravity traction (HGT) continues to be a vital tool in managing severe spinal conditions, offering a nonsurgical or preoperative approach to address spinal deformities. However, the correction effect that HGT can achieve for severe and rigid spinal deformity is currently unclear and the impact of HGT on the selection of spinal osteotomy grade was still unknown. Methods. A retrospective matched-cohort study was conducted and a total of 74 patients from January 2018 to December 2021 in our institution were finally enrolled in this study, including 27 patients in the HGT group and 47 patients in the non-HGT group based on whether patients receive HGT or not. Comprehensive assessments including radiographic outcomes, surgical parameters, and clinical complications were collect and analyzed before and after correction surgery. Results. Of the patients included in the HGT group, 21 had thoracic curvature and 6 had thoracolumbar/lumbar curvature, compared with 38 and 9 in the non-HGT group, respectively (P=0.66). There was no significant difference in the etiologies of scoliosis between two groups (15/7/3/2 vs. 25/16/4/2, P=0.85). The main curve in HGT and non-HGT groups were corrected from an average of 113.69°–51.25° and 111.94°–63.79° (P<0.01). For the HGT group, the mean correction rate of focal kyphosis (FK) was 45.43%, which was significantly higher than those in the non-HGT group (33.98%, P<0.05). There were no statistically significant differences in preoperative parameters of sagittal vertical axis (SVA) (P=0.13) or thoracic kyphosis (TK) (P=0.07) between the two groups. Postoperatively, the HGT group showed significantly lower values in SVA (P=0.001) and TK (P=0.001) compared to the non-HGT group. However, there was no significant difference in the imaging parameters coronal vertical axis (CVA) and apical vertebral translation (AVT) between the two groups (P>0.05). In the preoperative surgical planning phase before HGT treatment, 26 patients were initially considered candidates for 3-column osteotomy (3CO), while one patient was evaluated as suitable for posterior column osteotomy (PCO). Following HGT treatment, the assessment changed with 11 patients identified as candidates for 3CO and 16 patients deemed suitable for PCO. The application proportion of 3CO was significantly higher in the non-HGT group than in the HGT group (P<0.05). The mean blood loss of the non-HGT group was significantly greater than that of the HGT group (666.67 ± 486.55 ml vs. 1024.47 ± 718.46 ml, P<0.05), but the surgical time showed no difference between the two groups (297.33 ± 66.89 mins vs. 299.15 ± 56.73 mins, P=0.90). The incidence of complications in the HGT group was 7.4%, which was significantly lower than that of the non-HGT group (P<0.05). Conclusion. This study showed that the use of HGT, as a feasible and safe strategy, has superior efficacy and safety for treating severe and rigid scoliosis and can reduce the level of osteotomy used during surgery to some extent.
format Article
id doaj-art-0a1529dc7e6b482ab1628b0df1b23af5
institution Kabale University
issn 1742-1241
language English
publishDate 2024-01-01
publisher Wiley
record_format Article
series International Journal of Clinical Practice
spelling doaj-art-0a1529dc7e6b482ab1628b0df1b23af52025-02-03T06:14:54ZengWileyInternational Journal of Clinical Practice1742-12412024-01-01202410.1155/2024/6899125Effectiveness and Safety of Preoperative Halo Gravity Traction-Assisted Posterior Spinal Fusion Surgery for Severe and Rigid Scoliosis: A Comparative Matched-Cohort StudyYangpu Zhang0Bo Han1Jianqiang Wang2Yuzeng Liu3Yiqi Zhang4Yong Hai5Lijin Zhou6Department of Orthopedic SurgeryDepartment of Orthopedic SurgeryDepartment of Orthopedic SurgeryDepartment of Orthopedic SurgeryDepartment of Orthopedic SurgeryDepartment of Orthopedic SurgeryDepartment of Orthopedic SurgeryBackground. Severe and rigid scoliosis poses significant challenges in surgical correction, and innovative approaches are continually sought to enhance effectiveness and ensure patient safety. Halo-gravity traction (HGT) continues to be a vital tool in managing severe spinal conditions, offering a nonsurgical or preoperative approach to address spinal deformities. However, the correction effect that HGT can achieve for severe and rigid spinal deformity is currently unclear and the impact of HGT on the selection of spinal osteotomy grade was still unknown. Methods. A retrospective matched-cohort study was conducted and a total of 74 patients from January 2018 to December 2021 in our institution were finally enrolled in this study, including 27 patients in the HGT group and 47 patients in the non-HGT group based on whether patients receive HGT or not. Comprehensive assessments including radiographic outcomes, surgical parameters, and clinical complications were collect and analyzed before and after correction surgery. Results. Of the patients included in the HGT group, 21 had thoracic curvature and 6 had thoracolumbar/lumbar curvature, compared with 38 and 9 in the non-HGT group, respectively (P=0.66). There was no significant difference in the etiologies of scoliosis between two groups (15/7/3/2 vs. 25/16/4/2, P=0.85). The main curve in HGT and non-HGT groups were corrected from an average of 113.69°–51.25° and 111.94°–63.79° (P<0.01). For the HGT group, the mean correction rate of focal kyphosis (FK) was 45.43%, which was significantly higher than those in the non-HGT group (33.98%, P<0.05). There were no statistically significant differences in preoperative parameters of sagittal vertical axis (SVA) (P=0.13) or thoracic kyphosis (TK) (P=0.07) between the two groups. Postoperatively, the HGT group showed significantly lower values in SVA (P=0.001) and TK (P=0.001) compared to the non-HGT group. However, there was no significant difference in the imaging parameters coronal vertical axis (CVA) and apical vertebral translation (AVT) between the two groups (P>0.05). In the preoperative surgical planning phase before HGT treatment, 26 patients were initially considered candidates for 3-column osteotomy (3CO), while one patient was evaluated as suitable for posterior column osteotomy (PCO). Following HGT treatment, the assessment changed with 11 patients identified as candidates for 3CO and 16 patients deemed suitable for PCO. The application proportion of 3CO was significantly higher in the non-HGT group than in the HGT group (P<0.05). The mean blood loss of the non-HGT group was significantly greater than that of the HGT group (666.67 ± 486.55 ml vs. 1024.47 ± 718.46 ml, P<0.05), but the surgical time showed no difference between the two groups (297.33 ± 66.89 mins vs. 299.15 ± 56.73 mins, P=0.90). The incidence of complications in the HGT group was 7.4%, which was significantly lower than that of the non-HGT group (P<0.05). Conclusion. This study showed that the use of HGT, as a feasible and safe strategy, has superior efficacy and safety for treating severe and rigid scoliosis and can reduce the level of osteotomy used during surgery to some extent.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2024/6899125
spellingShingle Yangpu Zhang
Bo Han
Jianqiang Wang
Yuzeng Liu
Yiqi Zhang
Yong Hai
Lijin Zhou
Effectiveness and Safety of Preoperative Halo Gravity Traction-Assisted Posterior Spinal Fusion Surgery for Severe and Rigid Scoliosis: A Comparative Matched-Cohort Study
International Journal of Clinical Practice
title Effectiveness and Safety of Preoperative Halo Gravity Traction-Assisted Posterior Spinal Fusion Surgery for Severe and Rigid Scoliosis: A Comparative Matched-Cohort Study
title_full Effectiveness and Safety of Preoperative Halo Gravity Traction-Assisted Posterior Spinal Fusion Surgery for Severe and Rigid Scoliosis: A Comparative Matched-Cohort Study
title_fullStr Effectiveness and Safety of Preoperative Halo Gravity Traction-Assisted Posterior Spinal Fusion Surgery for Severe and Rigid Scoliosis: A Comparative Matched-Cohort Study
title_full_unstemmed Effectiveness and Safety of Preoperative Halo Gravity Traction-Assisted Posterior Spinal Fusion Surgery for Severe and Rigid Scoliosis: A Comparative Matched-Cohort Study
title_short Effectiveness and Safety of Preoperative Halo Gravity Traction-Assisted Posterior Spinal Fusion Surgery for Severe and Rigid Scoliosis: A Comparative Matched-Cohort Study
title_sort effectiveness and safety of preoperative halo gravity traction assisted posterior spinal fusion surgery for severe and rigid scoliosis a comparative matched cohort study
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2024/6899125
work_keys_str_mv AT yangpuzhang effectivenessandsafetyofpreoperativehalogravitytractionassistedposteriorspinalfusionsurgeryforsevereandrigidscoliosisacomparativematchedcohortstudy
AT bohan effectivenessandsafetyofpreoperativehalogravitytractionassistedposteriorspinalfusionsurgeryforsevereandrigidscoliosisacomparativematchedcohortstudy
AT jianqiangwang effectivenessandsafetyofpreoperativehalogravitytractionassistedposteriorspinalfusionsurgeryforsevereandrigidscoliosisacomparativematchedcohortstudy
AT yuzengliu effectivenessandsafetyofpreoperativehalogravitytractionassistedposteriorspinalfusionsurgeryforsevereandrigidscoliosisacomparativematchedcohortstudy
AT yiqizhang effectivenessandsafetyofpreoperativehalogravitytractionassistedposteriorspinalfusionsurgeryforsevereandrigidscoliosisacomparativematchedcohortstudy
AT yonghai effectivenessandsafetyofpreoperativehalogravitytractionassistedposteriorspinalfusionsurgeryforsevereandrigidscoliosisacomparativematchedcohortstudy
AT lijinzhou effectivenessandsafetyofpreoperativehalogravitytractionassistedposteriorspinalfusionsurgeryforsevereandrigidscoliosisacomparativematchedcohortstudy