Efficacy of Halo Pelvic Traction Versus Halo Gravity Traction in Treating Severe Rigid Spinal Deformities: A Matched Retrospective Study.

Study DesignMatched Retrospective Cohort Study.ObjectiveTo compare efficacy and safety of Halo gravity traction vs Halo pelvic traction in severe rigid spinal deformity.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed 104 severe rigid spinal deformity patients treated with preoperative Halo traction and posterior correction surgery (2016.1-2022.12). Patients were matched 1:1 by main curve Cobb angle and age into HGT and HPT groups (33 each). Radiographic parameters were assessed before and after traction, preoperatively, and at final follow-up. Surgical planning for osteotomy and fusion segments used pre-traction imaging, compared with actual outcomes. Traction duration, surgical parameters, and complications were recorded.ResultsHGT patients had 4.5 ± 1.5 months traction, improving main curve from 138.4° to 94.9° (23.5%) and kyphosis from 87.9° to 73.1° (22.6%), with postoperative values of 51.1° and 39.7°. HPT patients had 5.1 ± 1.1 months of traction, improving main curve from 143.2° to 69.6° (51.3%) and kyphosis from 117.7° to 56.8° (49.1%), with postoperative values of 56.1° and 34.5°. HPT showed better improvement ( < 0.05). HPT achieved 50% deformity improvement after 3 months, vs 5 months for HGT. By 7 months, >60% of HPT vs <10% of HGT patients reached this threshold. Planned three-column osteotomy dropped from 90.9% to 51.5% (actual 36.4%) in HGT and 84.8% to 21.2% (actual 9.1%) in HPT. HPT reduced osteotomy grade ( < 0.05) and fusion segments ( = 0.02) more effectively. Complication rates were similar.ConclusionsBoth HGT and HPT improve preoperative deformity, but HPT is more effective and better in reducing osteotomy grades and fusion segments.