Tag: Traction

Posted on

Single-stage correction of severe scoliosis with syringomyelia: performed with traction assistance without prophylactic neurosurgical decompression

J Neurosurg Spine 41:316–324, 2024

There is still controversy about whether it is necessary to perform prophylactic neurosurgical decompression for severe scoliosis (SS) with syringomyelia (SM) to reduce the risk of neurological complications during subsequent spinal correction. This study aimed to explore the safety and effectiveness of using traction-assisted single-stage spinal correction as a treatment for patients who had SS with SM (SS-SM).

METHODS The patients who had SS-SM without previous neurosurgical intervention and who underwent traction-assisted single-stage posterior spinal correction at a single center were included, and the initial, posttraction, and postoperative clinical data were reviewed. Based on preoperative MRI, the included patients were divided into two categories: those with versus those without Chiari malformation type I (CM-I–related SM [CS] vs idiopathic SM [IS]), and those with a moderate syrinx (MS) versus those with a large syrinx (LS). Different groups’ traction and operation contributions were calculated for comparisons (CS vs IS, MS vs LS).

RESULTS A total of 28 patients were included. The initial mean major scoliosis was 101.0° with a mean flexibility of 21.4%. After the operation, the mean total correction rate for scoliosis was 63.9%. The mean traction and operation contributions were 61.5% and 38.5%, respectively. Most of the patients (75%) underwent spinal corrections without 3-column osteotomies, and only 1 patient reported postoperative regional numbness without motor deficits. No differences were found in the mean total correction rates, traction, and operation contributions when comparing CS versus IS and MS versus LS with the comparable initial clinical data (p > 0.05). More than 50% of the total corrections were achieved by preoperative traction in all groups.

CONCLUSIONS Traction-assisted single-stage spinal correction can safely and effectively correct SS-SM without prophylactic neurosurgical decompression under strict patient selection. Additionally, traction can achieve more than half of the final spinal correction, even for patients with varying sizes of SMs.

Posted on

Spinal cord traction, vascular compromise, hypoxia, and metabolic derangements in the pathophysiology of tethered cord syndrome

Neurosurg Focus 29 (1):E9, 2010. (10.3171/2010.3.FOCUS1085)

The definition of tethered cord syndrome (TCS) relies mainly on radiological criteria and clinical picture. The presence of a thickened filum terminale and a low-lying conus medullaris in symptomatic patients is indicative of TCS. The radiological definition of TCS does not take into account cases that involve a normal-lying conus medullaris exhibiting symptoms of the disease.

Methods. The authors performed a MEDLINE search using the terms “tethered cord” and “pathophysiology.” The search returned a total of 134 studies. The studies were further filtered to identify mostly basic research studies in animal models or studies related to the biomechanics of the filum terminale and spinal cord.

Results. Spinal cord traction and the loss of filum terminale elasticity are the triggers that start a cascade of events occurring at the metabolic and vascular levels leading to symptoms of the disease. Traction on the caudal cord results in decreased blood flow causing metabolic derangements that culminate in motor, sensory, and urinary neurological deficits. The untethering operation restores blood flow and reverses the clinical picture in most symptomatic cases.

Conclusions. Although classically defined as a disease of a low-lying conus medullaris, the pathophysiology of TCS is much more complex and is dependent on a structural abnormality, with concomitant altered metabolic and vascular sequelae. Given the complex mechanisms underlying TCS, it is not surprising that the radiological criteria do not adequately address all presentations of the disease.

Posted on

No effect of traction in patients with low back pain: a single centre, single blind, randomized controlled trial of Intervertebral Differential Dynamics Therapy

Eur Spine J (2009) 18:1843–1850 DOI 10.1007/s00586-009-1044-3

Low back pain (LBP) poses a significant problem to society. Although initial conservative therapy may be beneficial, persisting chronic LBP still frequently leads to expensive invasive intervention. A novel non- invasive therapy that focuses on discogenic LBP is Intervertebral Differential Dynamics Therapy (IDD Therapy, North American Medical Corp. Reg U.S.). IDD Therapy consists of intermittent traction sessions in the Accu-SPINA device (Steadfast Corporation Ltd, Essex, UK), an FDA approved, class II medical device. The intervertebral disc and facet joints are unloaded through axial distraction, positioning and relaxation cycles. The purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of IDD Therapy when added to a standard graded activity program for chronic LBP patients. In a single blind, single centre, randomized controlled trial; 60 consecutive patients were assigned to either the SHAM or the IDD Therapy. All subjects received the standard conservative therapeutic care (graded activity) and 20 sessions in the Accu-SPINA device. The traction weight in the IDD Therapy was systematically increased until 50% of a person’s body weight plus 4.45 kg (10 lb) was reached. The SHAM group received a non-therapeutic traction weight of 4.45 kg in all sessions. The main outcome was assessed using a 100-mm visual analogue scale (VAS) for LBP. Secondary outcomes were VAS scores for leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Short-Form 36 (SF-36). All parameters were measured before and 2, 6 and 14 weeks after start of the treatment. Fear of (re)injury due to movement or activities (Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia), coping strategies (Utrecht Coping List) and use of pain medication were recorded before and at 14 weeks. A repeated measures analysis was performed. The two groups were comparable at baseline in terms of demographic, clinical and psychological characteristics, indicating that the random allocation had succeeded. VAS low back pain improved significantly from 61 (±25) to 32 (±27) with the IDD protocol and 53 (±26) to 36 (±27) in the SHAM protocol. Moreover, leg pain, ODI and SF-36 scores improved significantly but in both groups. The use of pain medication decreased significantly, whereas scores for kinesiophobia and coping remained at the same non-pathological level. None of the parameters showed a difference between both protocols. Both treatment regimes had a significant beneficial effect on LBP, leg pain, functional status and quality of life after 14 weeks. The added axial, intermittent, mechanical traction of IDD Therapy to a standard graded activity program has been shown not to be effective.

Proudly powered by WordPress