Evidence Hub

Halo traction evaluation of craniocervical instability in hereditary connective tissue disorder patients: Case series

Bohra H, Maalouly J, Neha C, Stewart C, Diwan AD, Petersingham G, Seex K, Rao PJ

Journal of clinical neuroscience : official journal of the Neurosurgical Society of Australasia, 2025

21 participants · 3 citations

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Craniocervical instability (CCI) is a condition commonly found in patients with connective tissue disorders such as Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome (EDS), leading to various symptoms. Assessing patients for surgical fusion as a treatment for CCI is challenging due to the complex nature of EDS-related symptoms. This study aimed to evaluate the role of pre-fusion halo-vest traction in alleviating symptoms and determining suitable candidates for fusion surgeries.

METHODS

EDS patients (n = 21) with neurological symptoms underwent insertion of halo-vest traction between 2019 and 2024. Patients completed a CCI Questionnaire before and after the halo-vest traction, reporting symptoms related to headache, vision, hearing, equilibrium, and function. Symptom groups were assigned scores based on patient responses, with one point for each affirmative answer. Before and after scores were analyzed using paired Student's t-test. Patients experiencing over 50 % improvement in the majority of symptoms were considered for definitive fusion surgery. 16 out of 21 patients subsequently underwent fusion for CCI.

RESULTS

The average age of the patients was 35 years, with a female-to-male ratio of 20:1, consistent with existing literature. Significant improvements were observed in various symptom groups after halo-vest traction, including headache (57 % improvement, p < 0.001), brainstem functions (71 % improvement, p < 0.001), cerebellar functions (55 % improvement, p < 0.001), hearing (63 %…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case series, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health. Reported size: 21 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free