Flat Back Syndrome

A healthy spine, viewed from the side, is not straight. It carries a series of gentle curves: a forward curve in the neck, a backward curve in the chest, and, most importantly here, a forward curve in the lower back known as the lumbar lordosis. This lordosis allows a person to stand upright with the head, chest and pelvis stacked economically over the feet, holding the body's centre of gravity in a position that costs very little muscular effort to maintain.

Flat back syndrome is, quite literally, the flattening of that lower curve. When the lumbar lordosis is lost or reduced, the upper body is no longer balanced over the pelvis but is carried forward of it. The trunk tips ahead of the hips, the gaze is drawn towards the floor, and standing fully erect becomes difficult or impossible. The essential abnormality is therefore one of the side-on profile of the spine — the sagittal plane — rather than the side-to-side profile that defines scoliosis.

In its classic sense, flat back syndrome is iatrogenic, meaning it arises as an unintended consequence of earlier treatment. It describes the loss of lumbar lordosis that follows certain types of spinal surgery, and the forward-leaning, fatiguing posture that develops as the body's attempts to compensate gradually fail. Understanding it well means understanding both how the lower curve is lost and why its loss is so demanding to live with.

Flat back syndrome sits within a wider family of problems grouped under sagittal imbalance, in which the trunk is carried forward of the pelvis. It is one specific cause within that family, not a synonym for the whole group. It differs from general adult degenerative sagittal imbalance, where the lower curve is also lost but the cause is wear and degeneration rather than earlier surgery. It differs from proximal junctional kyphosis, a focal forward angulation at the very top of a previous spinal fusion, where the instrumented spine meets the mobile spine above it. And it differs from camptocormia, or bent spine syndrome, in which a forward bend of the trunk is caused by a disorder of the muscles or by Parkinson's disease and typically eases on lying down; flat back syndrome is a fixed structural deformity that persists whether the person is standing or lying flat.

From the early 1960s until the early 1980s the Harrington rod was the standard surgical treatment for scoliosis. It worked by distraction: a straight metal rod was anchored to the spine and used to pull the curved vertebrae apart and straighter, correcting the side-to-side deformity. In the coronal plane it worked well. The difficulty lay in the side-on plane: a straight rod under distraction tends to flatten the natural forward curve of the lower back, particularly when extended down into the low lumbar spine, as was common practice. Many patients emerged with a well-corrected scoliosis but a lower back that had been straightened, its lordosis reduced or lost. Most felt well at first, and the consequences took years or even decades to declare themselves. Over that long interval the spine below the old fusion continued to age and the hips gradually lost some of their range of movement, both processes eroding the body's ability to compensate. The forward stoop, fatigue and difficulty standing upright slowly emerged ten to fifty years later. Modern systems use multiple anchor points and contoured rods that preserve and restore the lower curve, and the syndrome is consequently far less common as a result of scoliosis surgery today, although it can still arise when a lumbar fusion performed for other reasons is set in too little lordosis.

When the lower curve is lost the body deploys a chain of compensations to bring the head and trunk back over the feet. The underlying concept is the cone of economy: a narrow, energy-efficient envelope within which one can stand with very little effort. Lose the lower curve and the trunk is pushed towards the edge of that cone. Compensations occur in a predictable order. First the pelvis rotates backwards — pelvic retroversion — measured as a rise in pelvic tilt. Second the hips are extended to their limit. Third, when these are exhausted, the knees bend, lowering and retracting the trunk to keep the head over the feet. Higher up, the chest may flatten and the neck extend to keep the eyes level with the horizon.

All of this is muscularly expensive. Holding the pelvis retroverted, the hips extended and the knees flexed requires sustained contraction of the large muscles of the buttocks and thighs. These muscles tire, and as they tire the characteristic pattern appears: aching and fatigue in the back, buttocks and legs; a stoop that worsens through the day; relief on sitting or lying down; and, in time, an inability to compensate at all. Ageing matters greatly here, because declining muscle strength and hip movement exhaust the reserve that once kept a person upright, and a deformity silently present for decades finally becomes symptomatic.

Flat back syndrome is assessed through measurements taken from standing X-rays known as spinopelvic parameters. Pelvic incidence is a fixed, individual characteristic of the pelvis, set once growth is complete; it determines how much lower curve a particular spine ought to have. Lumbar lordosis is the actual amount of lower curve present, and the relationship between the two — the pelvic incidence to lumbar lordosis mismatch — is the cornerstone of assessment. A balanced spine keeps the two within about ten degrees of each other; a large mismatch where the lordosis falls short of what the pelvis requires is the hallmark of flat back syndrome and correlates with disability. Pelvic tilt records how far the pelvis has rotated backwards to compensate, and the sagittal vertical axis measures how far forward the trunk has fallen — a value beyond about fifty millimetres signifies positive sagittal imbalance. These parameters are drawn together in the SRS-Schwab classification.

The essential investigation is a full-length standing X-ray of the whole spine, taken from the side and the front, with the hips and knees included and the arms held in a standardised position so natural posture is not disguised. Sitting or lying-down films are misleading because they allow the trunk to fall back into balance and hide the very deformity being sought. From these films the spinopelvic parameters are measured. Flexibility is assessed with films taken lying down or over a bolster, which show how much of the forward lean can be reduced and how much is fixed by previous fusion — a distinction central to planning and one of the ways camptocormia is excluded. The range of movement at the hips is examined, since loss of hip extension is both a cause of decompensation and a factor in planning correction. MRI or CT may be used to look for canal narrowing, failure of an old fusion to heal, and to assess previous metalwork.

The evidence base rests on retrospective series, measurement and classification studies, and the experience of specialist centres rather than large randomised trials. Non-surgical measures have limited capacity to alter the structural problem, because no exercise or appliance can restore a lower curve that has been lost within fused or flattened segments. Physiotherapy, conditioning of the hip and trunk muscles, pacing and walking aids may help manage symptoms but do not correct the underlying deformity. The definitive treatments described are corrective osteotomies that re-create the lost curve. A pedicle subtraction osteotomy removes a wedge of bone through a single vertebra and closes it down, generating around thirty degrees of new curve at one level; it is the technique most often described for the fixed deformity that follows previous fusion. Smith-Petersen (Ponte) osteotomies remove bone at the back of the spine across mobile segments, contributing around ten degrees per level, and several can be combined. For the most severe deformities, vertebral column resection and anterior interbody techniques are described. These are major operations and the literature documents a meaningful burden of complications including substantial blood loss, risks to nerves, failure of bone to heal, breakage of metalwork and later junctional problems. Where deformity is well corrected and spinopelvic targets are achieved, reported outcomes for posture, pain and function are generally favourable, but the decision to undertake such surgery is always individualised.

Left unaddressed, the natural history is one of gradual worsening as the body's compensations are eroded by ageing muscles, stiffening hips and continuing degeneration below an old fusion, so that the forward stoop and fatigue increase rather than settle. Where corrective surgery successfully restores the lower curve, the reported results are generally encouraging in terms of standing posture, the ability to look ahead, the reduction of fatigue and the improvement in pain and daily function, set against the considerable demands and recognised risks of major surgery.

This page is general medical education and is not a substitute for individual advice. New or worsening weakness or numbness, saddle numbness or any disturbance of bladder or bowel control requires urgent assessment.

• —LaGrone MO, Bradford DS, Moe JH, et al. Treatment of symptomatic flatback after spinal fusion. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1988;70(4):569–580. PMID 3356723.
• —Booth KC, Bridwell KH, Lenke LG, et al. Complications and predictive factors for the successful treatment of flatback deformity (fixed sagittal imbalance). Spine. 1999;24(16):1712–1720. PMID 10472106.
• —Bridwell KH. Decision making regarding Smith-Petersen vs. pedicle subtraction osteotomy vs. vertebral column resection for spinal deformity. Spine. 2006;31(19 Suppl):S171–S178. PMID 16946635.
• —Bridwell KH, Lewis SJ, Lenke LG, et al. Pedicle subtraction osteotomy for the treatment of fixed sagittal imbalance. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003;85(3):454–463. PMID 12637431.
• —Cho KJ, Bridwell KH, Lenke LG, et al. Comparison of Smith-Petersen versus pedicle subtraction osteotomy for the correction of fixed sagittal imbalance. Spine. 2005;30(18):2030–2037. PMID 16166890.
• —Schwab F, Ungar B, Blondel B, et al. SRS-Schwab adult spinal deformity classification: a validation study. Spine. 2012;37(12):1077–1082. PMID 22045006.
• —Schwab FJ, Blondel B, Bess S, et al. Radiographical spinopelvic parameters and disability in adult spinal deformity. Spine. 2013;38(13):E803–E812. PMID 23722572.
• —Lafage V, Schwab F, Patel A, et al. Pelvic tilt and truncal inclination: two key radiographic parameters in adults with spinal deformity. Spine. 2009;34(17):E599–E606. PMID 19644319.
• —Glassman SD, Bridwell K, Dimar JR, et al. The impact of positive sagittal balance in adult spinal deformity. Spine. 2005;30(18):2024–2029. PMID 16166889.
• —Glassman SD, Berven S, Bridwell K, et al. Correlation of radiographic parameters and clinical symptoms in adult scoliosis. Spine. 2005;30(6):682–688. PMID 15770185.
• —Legaye J, Duval-Beaupère G, Hecquet J, Marty C. Pelvic incidence: a fundamental pelvic parameter for three-dimensional regulation of spinal sagittal curves. Eur Spine J. 1998;7(2):99–103. PMID 9629932.
• —Duval-Beaupère G, Schmidt C, Cosson P. A barycentremetric study of the sagittal shape of spine and pelvis. Ann Biomed Eng. 1992;20(4):451–462. PMID 1510296.
• —Roussouly P, Gollogly S, Berthonnaud E, Dimnet J. Classification of the normal variation in the sagittal alignment of the human lumbar spine and pelvis. Spine. 2005;30(3):346–353. PMID 15682018.
• —Vialle R, Levassor N, Rillardon L, et al. Radiographic analysis of the sagittal alignment and balance of the spine in asymptomatic subjects. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87(2):260–267. PMID 15687145.
• —Yilgor C, Sogunmez N, Boissiere L, et al. Global Alignment and Proportion (GAP) score. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2017;99(19):1661–1672. PMID 28976431.
• —Smith-Petersen MN, Larson CB, Aufranc OE. Osteotomy of the spine for correction of flexion deformity in rheumatoid arthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1945;27(1):1–11.
• —Thomasen E. Vertebral osteotomy for correction of kyphosis in ankylosing spondylitis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1985;(194):142–152. PMID 3978906.
• —Berven SH, Deviren V, Smith JA, et al. Management of fixed sagittal plane deformity: outcome of combined anterior and posterior surgery. Spine. 2003;28(15):1710–1715. PMID 12897500.
• —Schwab F, Patel A, Ungar B, et al. Adult spinal deformity — postoperative standing imbalance. Spine. 2010;35(25):2224–2231. PMID 21102297.
• —Lafage R, Schwab F, Challier V, et al. Defining spino-pelvic alignment thresholds: should operative goals account for age? Spine. 2016;41(1):62–68. PMID 26689395.
• —Takemitsu Y, Harada Y, Iwahara T, et al. Lumbar degenerative kyphosis: clinical, radiological and epidemiological studies. Spine. 1988;13(11):1317–1326. PMID 3206300.
• —Aebi M. The adult scoliosis. Eur Spine J. 2005;14(10):925–948. PMID 16328223.
• —Finsterer J, Strobl W. Presentation, etiology, diagnosis and treatment of camptocormia. Eur Neurol. 2010;64(1):1–8. PMID 20634620.
• —Ghosh PS, Milone M. Camptocormia as presenting manifestation of a spectrum of myopathic disorders. Muscle Nerve. 2015;52(6):1008–1012. PMID 25809536.

This information is for general patient education and is not a substitute for an individual consultation. Always seek personalised advice from a qualified spinal specialist.