Skip to main content

Table 5 Comparisons to the studies through posterior-only approach for post-tubercular healed kyphotic spinal deformitya

From: Two-stage treatment for severe spinal kyphotic deformity secondary to tuberculosis: halo-pelvic traction followed by a posterior-only approach correction

Author and year

Number of patients

Age

(years)

Follow-up

(months)

Type of osteotomy

Kyphosis (°)

(preoperative/final follow-up/correction loss)

Functional core (preoperative/postoperative)

Complications (%)

overall/neurological

Liu et al. [9]

2016

28

20.9

96.9

PVCR

70.7 / 30.2 / 8.5

SRS-22: 2.61 / 3.68

ODI: 55.1 / 15.0

21.4 / 3.5

Rajasekaran et al. [10] 2010

17

18.3

43

CWO

69.2 / 32.4 / 5.4

VAS: 9.2 / 1.5

ODI: 56.4 / 10.6

29.4 / 5.88

Zhang et al. [24]

2013

15

35.8

36.1

PVCR

92.3 / 34.5 / 2.4

VAS: 8.7 / 2.2

ODI: 46.5 / 5.7

NA / 0

Garg et al. [13]

2021

47

16

43

PVCR

68.2 / 30.9 / 1.3

SRS-22: 2.7 / 4

29.7 / 8.5

Zeng et al. [12]

2012

36

34

31.3

PSO (7) / PVCR (29)

89.3 / 29.3 / NA

VAS: 2.0 / 0.7

16.6 / 8.3

Wang et al. [23]

2009

9

26.2

30.6

PVCR

97.2 / 17.2 / 1.6

NA

11.1 / 11.1

Muheremu et al. [25] 2017

40

33

range 2–19

HPT + PF

95.6 / 28.3 / NA

NA

NA / NA

Current study

19

29.7

26.5

HPT + PF

131.40 / 65.7 / 2.9

SRS-22: 3.0 / 4.2

15.7 / 5.3

  1. NA not applicable, SRS-22 scoliosis research society outcomes questionnaire, ODI Oswestry Disability Index, VAS visual analog scale, PVCR posterior vertebral column resection, CWO closing opening wedge osteotomy, PSO pedicle subtraction osteotomy, HPT halo-pelvic traction, PF posterior fusion
  2. aOnly studies with 5 or more cases have been considered