The history of modern spinal traction with particular reference to neural disorders

The last 200 years of the history of spinal traction is described in the present article. The study starts at the end of the 18th century with the works of JA Venel (1789) who tried to apply the Hippocratic idea to modern surgery. Orthopedic specialists of the last century were mostly preoccupied wi...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Spinal cord 1997-03, Vol.35 (3), p.139-146
1. Verfasser: Shterenshis, Michael V
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:The last 200 years of the history of spinal traction is described in the present article. The study starts at the end of the 18th century with the works of JA Venel (1789) who tried to apply the Hippocratic idea to modern surgery. Orthopedic specialists of the last century were mostly preoccupied with corsets and the method gained broader popularity when neurologists paid attention to the similar method of suspension. The Russian neurologist Osip Mochutkovsky described suspension as a method for the treatment of tabes dorsalis in an article published in the Russian magazine `Vratch' in 1883. His works became known in Europe when JM Charcot paid attention to it and published a special short monograph on this subject in 1889. This work was translated into English (1889) and Russian (1890) and the method became popular in the treatment of tabes dorsalis and other neurological diseases. The eminent Russian neurologist VM Bekhterev proposed the combination of body suspension with cervical traction (1893). Some years later Gilles de la Tourette promoted the use of spinal traction in his neurological clinic (1897). Unfortunately neurologists worked without the cooperation of orthopedic specialists. During the first decades of the 20th century suspension was also replaced by traction in neurology. This method was used by both neurologists and orthopedic specialists but in the last decades neurologists lost their interests in it and it found greater use in traumatology and in spinal surgery where it is still in use today.
ISSN:1362-4393
1476-5624
DOI:10.1038/sj.sc.3100378