ArticleSpine deformity2026
Eccentric cranial traction combined with concave-side distraction: a novel and effective management for correcting congenital cervical scoliosis.
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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study introduces eccentric cranial traction (ECT) as a traction method for congenital cervical scoliosis (CCS) at the craniovertebral junction (CVJ) and evaluates its benefits when combined with concave-side distraction surgery.
methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on 18 patients with CCS at the CVJ treated between 2019 and 2023 using ECT followed by concave-side distraction. Radiographic parameters were assessed at five time points: pre-operation, pre-traction, post-traction, post-operation, and final follow-up. Baseline demographic and surgical data were recorded. Patients were stratified into high- and low-responder groups based on the median value of the traction correction rate, and outcomes were compared between groups. The correlation between traction correction rate and surgical correction rate was also analyzed.
resultsThe median age at ECT initiation was 8 years, and the median duration of traction was 8 days. All patients presented with deformities involving the CVJ. ECT significantly reduced head-neck tilt from 16.5 ± 9.3° to 9.5 ± 5.9° (P < 0.001), yielding a mean traction correction rate of 43.1%. All patients subsequently underwent concave-side distraction at the CVJ, which resulted in a significant improvement in the Cobb angle from 36.0 ± 13.6° to 6.1 (IQR, 4.0, 10.9) (P < 0.05). At a median follow-up of 25.0 months (IQR, 24.0-30.0), the Cobb angle had increased slightly to 6.2° (IQR, 4.5-13.2), but the change was not statistically significant. Compared with the low-responder group, the high-responder group showed no significant differences in baseline parameters but had significantly shorter operative times (P < 0.05). No complications occurred during the traction period. Intraoperative complications included transient nerve root palsy and cerebrospinal fluid leakage, all of which resolved without long-term sequelae.
conclusionsThe combination of eccentric cranial traction and concave-side distraction offers a feasible and safe option for congenital cervical scoliosis at the craniovertebral junction. Traction responsiveness showed preliminary value in reflecting deformity flexibility and surgical complexity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41548178What 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.