1975
DOI: 10.1097/00003086-197507000-00014
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Viscoelastic Behaviour of Deformed Spines Under Correction with Halo Pelvic Distraction

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
12
0
2

Year Published

1976
1976
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
1
12
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…There is a period of primary creep for about 2-4 h, in which the correction is relatively important. A secondary creep period allows a more gradual reduction of the spinal deformity, such that near maximal curve correction can be obtained after about 10-12 days [17].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There is a period of primary creep for about 2-4 h, in which the correction is relatively important. A secondary creep period allows a more gradual reduction of the spinal deformity, such that near maximal curve correction can be obtained after about 10-12 days [17].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The existing theories mainly implicate the hematoma caused by the injury, the injury to the soft tissues, or a coexisting fracture. The pattern of injury was also related to autofusion (2,3,9,10). Dove et al (4,5), to explain spontaneous fusion after halopelvic traction, conjectured that distraction of the spine resulted in distraction and consequent stiffness of the cervical spine ligaments and avul- In clinical studies, Nicoll (14) reported spontaneous fusion in 70% of fracture-dislocations of the spine.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Many theories have been formulated since then, most of which implicate hematoma as the main cause of bone formation and subsequent fusion, as well as injuries of the soft tissues or the coexistence of a fracture. Spontaneous traumatic fusion has been associated with the type of injury (4,6,9,10,13,15), immobilization (3,8), and soft-tissue distraction (2,3). The mechanism of injury was also associated with spontaneous fusion (2).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is more likely when several months have elapsed between the last operation and the removal of the apparatus and in patients with paralytic neck muscles. Although one is not actively lengthening the spine it is continually deforming (or "creeping") with the passage of time (6). A typical example of this phenomenon is case 18, a patient with a severe lumbar tuberculous kyphosis, who was corrected by staged procedures and then remained in the apparatus for a further 8 months.…”
Section: Continuing Lengthening Without Actual Distractionmentioning
confidence: 99%