This review of the literature presents the current understanding of Scheuermann’s kyphosis and investigates the controversies concerning conservative and surgical treatment. There is considerable debate regarding the pathogenesis, natural history and treatment of this condition. A benign prognosis with settling of symptoms and stabilisation of the deformity at skeletal maturity is expected in most patients. Observation and programmes of exercise are appropriate for mild, flexible, non-progressive deformities. Bracing is indicated for a moderate deformity which spans several levels and retains flexibility in motivated patients who have significant remaining spinal growth. The loss of some correction after the completion of bracing with recurrent anterior vertebral wedging has been reported in approximately one-third of patients. Surgical correction with instrumented spinal fusion is indicated for a severe kyphosis which carries a risk of progression beyond the end of growth causing cosmetic deformity, back pain and neurological complications. There is no consensus on the effectiveness of different techniques and types of instrumentation. Techniques include posterior-only and combined anteroposterior spinal fusion with or without posterior osteotomies across the apex of the deformity. Current instrumented techniques include hybrid and all-pedicle screw constructs

Aims

Significant correction of an adolescent idiopathic scoliosis in the coronal plane through a posterior approach is associated with hypokyphosis. Factors such as the magnitude of the preoperative coronal curve, the use of hooks, number of levels fused, preoperative kyphosis, screw density, and rod type have all been implicated. Maintaining the normal thoracic kyphosis is important as hypokyphosis is associated with proximal junctional failure (PJF) and early onset degeneration of the spine. The aim of this study was to determine if coronal correction per se was the most relevant factor in generating hypokyphosis.

The aim of this study was to determine whether obesity affects pain, surgical and functional outcomes following lumbar spinal fusion for low back pain (LBP).

A systematic literature review and meta-analysis was made of those studies that compared the outcome of lumbar spinal fusion for LBP in obese and non-obese patients. A total of 17 studies were included in the meta-analysis. There was no difference in the pain and functional outcomes. Lumbar spinal fusion in the obese patient resulted in a statistically significantly greater intra-operative blood loss (weighted mean difference: 54.04 ml; 95% confidence interval (CI) 15.08 to 93.00; n = 112; p = 0.007) more complications (odds ratio: 1.91; 95% CI 1.68 to 2.18; n = 43858; p < 0.001) and longer duration of surgery (25.75 mins; 95% CI 15.61 to 35.90; n = 258; p < 0.001). Obese patients have greater intra-operative blood loss, more complications and longer duration of surgery but pain and functional outcome are similar to non-obese patients. Based on these results, obesity is not a contraindication to lumbar spinal fusion.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:1395–1404.

Clinical, radiological, and Scoliosis Research Society-22 questionnaire data were reviewed pre-operatively and two years post-operatively for patients with thoracolumbar/lumbar adolescent idiopathic scoliosis treated by posterior spinal fusion using a unilateral convex segmental pedicle screw technique. A total of 72 patients were included (67 female, 5 male; mean age at surgery 16.7 years (13 to 23)) and divided into groups: group 1 included 53 patients who underwent fusion between the vertebrae at the limit of the curve (proximal and distal end vertebrae); group 2 included 19 patients who underwent extension of the fusion distally beyond the caudal end vertebra.

A mean scoliosis correction of 80% (45% to 100%) was achieved. The mean post-operative lowest instrumented vertebra angle, apical vertebra translation and trunk shift were less than in previous studies. A total of five pre-operative radiological parameters differed significantly between the groups and correlated with the extension of the fusion distally: the size of the thoracolumbar/lumbar curve, the lowest instrumented vertebra angle, apical vertebra translation, the Cobb angle on lumbar convex bending and the size of the compensatory thoracic curve. Regression analysis allowed an equation incorporating these parameters to be developed which had a positive predictive value of 81% in determining whether the lowest instrumented vertebra should be at the caudal end vertebra or one or two levels more distal. There were no differences in the Scoliosis Research Society-22 outcome scores between the two groups (p = 0.17).

In conclusion, thoracolumbar/lumbar curves in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis may be effectively treated by posterior spinal fusion using a unilateral segmental pedicle screw technique. Five radiological parameters correlate with the need for distal extension of the fusion, and an equation incorporating these parameters reliably informs selection of the lowest instrumented vertebra.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:1082–9.