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.

Between January 1990 and December 2000 we carried out 226 SB Charité III disc replacements for lumbar disc degeneration in 160 patients. They were reviewed at a mean follow-up of 79 months (31 to 161) to determine the clinical and radiological outcome. The clinical results were collected by an independent observer, who was not involved in patient selection, treatment or follow-up, using a combination of outcome measures, including the Oswestry Disability Index. Pain was recorded using a visual analogue score, and the most recent radiographs were reviewed.

Survival of the device was analysed by the Kaplan-Meier method and showed a cumulative survival of 35% at 156 months when radiological failure was taken as the endpoint. The mean improvement in the Oswestry disability index scores after disc replacement was 14% (6% to 21%) and the mean improvement in the pain score was 1.6 (0.46 to 2.73), both falling below the clinically significant threshold. Removal of the implant was required in 12 patients, four because of implant failure.

These poor results indicate that further use of this implant is not justified.

In order to identify the risk factors and the incidence of post-operative spinal epidural haematoma, we analysed the records of 14 932 patients undergoing spinal surgery between 1984 and 2002. Of these, 32 (0.2%) required re-operation within one week of the initial procedure and had an International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-9 code for haematoma complicating a procedure (998.12). As controls, we selected those who had undergone a procedure of equal complexity by the same surgeon but who had not developed this complication. Risks identified before operation were older than 60 years of age, the use of pre-operative non-steroidal anti-inflammatories and Rh-positive blood type. Those during the procedure were involvement of more than five operative levels, a haemoglobin < 10 g/dL, and blood loss > 1 L, and after operation an international normalised ratio > 2.0 within the first 48 hours. All these were identified as significant (p < 0.03). Well-controlled anticoagulation and the use of drains were not associated with an increased risk of post-operative spinal epidural haematoma.