[Objective] To review the clinical and radiographic results of the two methods in adult severe rigid curves, analyzing its efficacy, advantages and possible complications.[Methods]Retrospectively review 53 cases with severe rigid spinal deformity treated in our hospital from Jan 2011 to Aug 2017, all the patients were divided into two groups: 35 patients treated with posterior mini-incision internal screw rod distraction before posterior fusion, compared to a series of 18 patients who had a two-stage correction started with an external halo-pelvic traction. Patients within each group were analyzed based on demographics,perioperative, radiographic data and complications. The average follow-up time were 39.49 and 29.28 months. [Results] There was no statistically significant difference in main coronal curve correction and sagittal kyphosis after either external or internal traction, and so was the main coronal curve after final fusion surgery in both groups,（49.25% vs 45.54%, P＞0.05）.Sagittal kyphosis was significantly better corrected in posterior mini-incision internal distraction group than that in Halo-hemipelvic traction group (56.59% vs 45.38%，P＜0.05） immediately after final fusion surgery. The hospital stay was shorter in posterior mini-incision internal distraction group （67.49d vs 215.28d，P＜0.05）, and blood loss was less in Halo-hemipelvic traction group（3054.29ml vs 897.22ml，P＜0.05）, there was no significant difference in operative time and fusion segments between the two groups. The major complication rate was 15.09%, the difference between two groups was not significant (11.4% vs 22.2%，P＞0.05). [Conclusion] Both of the two protocols of staged surgery offer a safe and effective way in the treatment of adult severe rigid spinal deformity. Halo-hemipelvic traction is an ideal way to deal with those scoliosis with spinal cord deformities that can’t be treated preoperatively.