ArticleZhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery2020
[Comparison of radiological changes after Halo-pelvic traction with posterior spinal osteotomy versus simple posterior spinal osteotomy for severe rigid spinal deformity].
Article in Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Halo-pelvic traction in the treatment of severe scoliosis: a meta-analysis.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2023Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the changes of scoliosis and kyphosis angles after Halo-pelvic traction with posterior spinal osteotomy versus simple posterior spinal osteotomy for severe rigid spinal deformity.
methodsA clinical data of 28 patients with severe rigid spinal deformity between January 2015 and November 2017 was retrospectively analyzed. Sixteen patients were treated by Halo-pelvic traction with posterior spinal osteotomy (group A) and 12 patients were treated with posterior spinal osteotomy only (group B). There was no significant difference between the two groups (
resultsAll patients were followed up 24-30 months (mean, 26.5 months). The operation time and intraoperative blood loss were significantly less in group A than in group B (
conclusionFor the severe rigid spinal deformity, Halo-pelvic traction with posterior spinal osteotomy and simple posterior spinal osteotomy can obtain the same orthopedic effect and postoperative deformity correction. However, the Halo-pelvic traction can shorten operation time, reduce blood loss and incidence of perioperative complications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.