ArticleSpine deformity2026
Impact of preoperative halo-gravity traction on radiographic and surgical outcomes following posterior spinal fusion in osteogenesis imperfecta: a comparative study.
Article in Spine deformity, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeOsteogenesis Imperfecta (OI) is a rare connective tissue disorder often associated with severe, brace-resistant scoliosis. Posterior spinal fusion (PSF) with pedicle screws can achieve up to 60% coronal correction, while preoperative halo-gravity traction (HGT) may provide additional benefits but carries potential risks. This study evaluated whether HGT offers perioperative or radiographic advantages compared with PSF alone in pediatric OI patients.
methodsThirty-six patients treated between 2002 and 2020 with ≥ 2 years' follow-up were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into HGT + PSF (N = 19) and PSF-only (N = 17) groups, comparable in baseline characteristics. The primary outcome was coronal correction rate (CR); secondary outcomes included operative time, blood loss, length of stay (LOS), complications (Modified Clavien-Dindo-Sink Classification, MCDS), and loss of correction at follow-up. Statistical comparisons used Mann-Whitney U and Chi-Squared tests (p < 0.05).
resultsPostoperative major and minor curve CR were 60.2% and 66.5% in the HGT + PSF group vs. 55.1% and 37.7% in PSF (p = 0.337 and p = 0.003). At last follow-up, CR was 51.1% and 38.8% for HGT + PSF vs. 44.9% and 25.2% for PSF (p = 0.298 and p = 0.238). Mean blood loss (1235 vs. 1368 mL, p = 0.972), operative time (443 vs. 410 min, p = 0.490), and LOS (12.6 vs. 9.5 days, p = 0.186) were not significantly different. Complications occurred in 57.9% of HGT + PSF vs. 29.4% of PSF patients (p = 0.367), with more major complications in the HGT + PSF group.
conclusionsIn this cohort, HGT provided only modest additional coronal correction without clear perioperative advantages compared with PSF alone. Given these limited and partly transient effects, its routine use should be considered cautiously and in the context of individual patient characteristics. Larger prospective multicenter studies are needed to clarify the specific clinical scenarios in which preoperative HGT may offer meaningful benefit in the surgical management of OI-related scoliosis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41533302What 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.