ArticleOrthopaedic surgery2025
The Halo Vest Immobilization for Craniocervical Junction Tuberculosis: A Comparison of Treatment Options.
Article in Orthopaedic surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe treatment of tuberculosis at the craniovertebral junction (CVJ) remains challenging, with significant debate surrounding therapeutic approaches. Halo vest (HV) therapy provides a non-invasive immobilization alternative, while occipitocervical fusion (OCF) offers a surgical option. However, limited evidence exists comparing the efficacy of HV therapy with OCF for CVJ tuberculosis. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes and safety of HV immobilization in treating CVJ tuberculosis, compared with OCF.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study was conducted from January 2012 to December 2022 and included 43 patients diagnosed with CVJ tuberculosis. Radiographic and treatment data were meticulously analyzed to compare outcomes between patients treated with HV immobilization (Group H, n = 22) and those undergoing OCF (Group O, n = 21). Interventions comprised at least 28 weeks of HV immobilization for Group H and OCF supplemented with postoperative external fixation for Group O. Outcomes were evaluated using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS-neck), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and radiographic stability (assessed via X-ray and CT). Statistical analyses included the Student's t-test (parametric data), Mann-Whitney U test (nonparametric data), and chi-square test (categorical variables), with a significance level set at p < 0.05.
resultsOver a 24-month follow-up, all patients exhibited successful healing of tuberculosis lesions. Group H demonstrated greater improvements in cervical flexion-extension and rotation function compared with Group O. Both groups showed statistically significant decreases in Visual Analog Scale (VAS-neck) and Neck Disability Index (NDI) scores, as well as in ESR and C-reactive protein (CRP) values from pre-surgery levels (p < 0.01). Notably, differences in VAS-neck (1 month) and NDI (24 months) between the groups were statistically significant (p < 0.05), while no significant differences were observed in other follow-up periods (p > 0.05). Additionally, there were no significant differences in ESR and CRP values at any time point between the treatment groups (p > 0.05).
conclusionsThe study yielded satisfactory outcomes for all patients. Short-term differences in pain relief did not significantly impact the healing of CVJ tuberculosis. Patients receiving HV treatment showed greater improvement in neck function compared with those undergoing occipitocervical fusion. Given the substantial costs and risks associated with open surgery, we advocate for conservative treatment utilizing HV.
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.