Frontal correction assessment in severe adolescent idiopathic scoliosis surgery using halo gravity traction before to posterior vertebral arthrodesis: a multicenter retrospective observational study

Tristan Langlais,Antoine Josse,Philippe Violas,and the French Society of Orthopaedic Paediatric (SOFOP),Sofop,Franck Accadbled,Emilie André,Damien Fron,Antoine Hamel,Adèle Happiette,Thierry Haumont,Brice Ilharreborde,Pierre Journeau,Yan Lefèvre,Gregory Lucas,Christian Morin,Thierry Odent,Sébastien Pesenti,Jérôme Sales de Gauzy,Catalin Ursu,Raphaël Vialle
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-023-08062-z
Abstract:Purpose: Preoperative preparation with halo gravity traction (HGT) has several advantages but is still controversial. A multicenter, observational, retrospective study was conducted to determine whether HGT provides better frontal correction in surgery for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). Methods: Between 2010 and 2020, all patients who underwent posterior spinal fusion (PSF) AIS with a Cobb angle greater than 80° were included. The included patients who underwent HGT were compared (complications rate and radiographic parameters) to patients who did not undergo traction (noHGT). For patients who underwent HGT, a spinal front X-ray at the end of the traction procedure was performed. Results: Sixty-four in noHGT and forty-seven in HGT group were analyzed with a 31-month mean follow-up. The mean ratio of Cobb angle correction was 58.8% in noHGT and 63.6% in HGT group (p = 0.023). In HGT, this ratio reached 9% if the traction lasted longer than 30 days (p = 0.009). The complication rate was 11.7% with a rate of 6.2% in noHGT and 19.1% in HGT group (p = 0.07). In patient whose preoperative Cobb angle was greater than 90°, the mean ratio of Cobb angle correction increases to 6.7% (p = 0.035) and the complications rate increased to 14% in the no HGT group and decreased to 13% in the HGT group (p = 0.9). Conclusion: HGT preparation in the management of correction of AIS with a Cobb angle greater than 90° is a technique providing a greater frontal correction gain with similar complication rate than PSF correction alone. We recommend a minimum halo duration of 4 weeks.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?