header advert
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

Spine

THE NATURAL HISTORY OF SCHEUERMANN'S KYPHOSIS – A COMPARATIVE STUDY AFTER 37-YEAR FOLLOW-UP

Combined British Scoliosis Society/Nordic Spinal Deformity Society (BSS/NSDS)



Abstract

The purpose was to investigate back pain and disability and their relationship to vertebral changes in patients with untreated Scheuermann's.

Overall, 136 patients who had attended the outpatient clinics between 1950 and 1990 for Scheuermann's were contacted, 49 of them (12 females, 37 males) responded. There was no difference in the baseline data between responders and non-responders. From radiographs, th-kyphosis, l-lordosis, and scoliosis were measured. The number of affected vertebrae and the degree of wedging were registered. Anthropometric data, occurrence of back pain, disability scores, and employment status were compared to a representative sample (n=3835) of the normal population.

After mean follow-up of 37 (6.5;25.9-53.7) y, their average age was 58.8 (8.2;44.4.-79.3) y. Male patients were significantly taller than the control subjects. Female patients were on average 6 kg heavier (P=0.016) and their mean BMI was higher (23.9 kg/m2 vs 20.8 kg/m2,P=0.001) at age 20 than in the controls.

Females had a greater mean kyphosis than males (51.7 vs. 43.2°, p=0.11). There was no correlation between the degree of thoracic kyphosis and disability. Scheuermann's patients had an increased risk for constant back pain (P=0.003), a 2.6-fold risk for disability because of back pain during the past 5 years (P=0.002), a 3.7-fold risk for back pain during the past 30 days (P<0.001), and a 2.3-fold risk for sciatic pain (P=0.005). They reported a poorer quality of life (p<0.001) and general health (p<0.001). There was no difference in working ability and employment status between patients and controls.



Ethics approval: none

Conflict of interest: none