Spine surgery has experienced much technological innovation over the past several decades. The field has seen advancements in operative techniques, implants and biologics, and equipment such as computer-assisted navigation and surgical robotics. With the arrival of real-time image guidance and navigation capabilities along with the computing ability to process and reconstruct these data into an interactive three-dimensional spinal "map", so too have the applications of surgical robotic technology. While spinal robotics and navigation represent promising potential for improving modern spinal surgery, it remains paramount to demonstrate its superiority as compared to traditional techniques prior to assimilation of its use amongst surgeons.The applications for intraoperative navigation and image-guided robotics have expanded to surgical resection of spinal column and intradural tumors, revision procedures on arthrodesed spines, and deformity cases with distorted anatomy. Additionally, these platforms may mitigate much of the harmful radiation exposure in minimally invasive surgery to which the patient, surgeon, and ancillary operating room staff are subjected.Spine surgery relies upon meticulous fine motor skills to manipulate neural elements and a steady hand while doing so, often exploiting small working corridors utilizing exposures that minimize collateral damage. Additionally, the procedures may be long and arduous, predisposing the surgeon to both mental and physical fatigue. In light of these characteristics, spine surgery may actually be an ideal candidate for the integration of navigation and robotic-assisted procedures.With this paper, we aim to critically evaluate the current literature and explore the options available for intraoperative navigation and robotic-assisted spine surgery.

Study Design Systematic literature review and meta-analysis of studies published in English. Objective This study evaluated differences in outcome variables between percutaneous and open pedicle screws for traumatic thoracolumbar fractures. Methods A systematic review of PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase was performed. The variables of interest included postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) pain score, kyphosis angle, and vertebral body height, as well as intraoperative blood loss and operative time. The results were pooled by calculating the effect size based on the standardized difference in means. The studies were weighted by the inverse of the variance, which included both within- and between-study error. Confidence intervals were reported at 95%. Heterogeneity was assessed using the Q statistic and I 2. Results After two-reviewer assessment, 38 studies were eliminated. Six studies were found to meet inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. The combined effect size was found to be in favor of percutaneous fixation for blood loss and operative time (p < 0.05); however, there were no differences in vertebral body height (VBH), kyphosis angle, or VAS scores between open and percutaneous fixation. All of the studies demonstrated relative homogeneity, with I 2 < 25. Conclusions Patients with thoracolumbar fractures can be effectively managed with percutaneous or open pedicle screw placement. There are no differences in VBH, kyphosis angle, or VAS between the two groups. Blood loss and operative time were decreased in the percutaneous group, which may represent a potential benefit, particularly in the polytraumatized patient. All variables in this study demonstrated near-perfect homogeneity, and the effect is likely close to the true effect.

Study Design:Review article.Objectives:A review of the literature on postoperative spinal infections, their diagnosis, and management.Methods:A systematic computerized Medline literature search was performed using PubMed, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and EMBASE. The electronic databases were searched for publication dates from the last 10 years. The searches were performed from Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) used by the National Library of Medicine. Specifically, MeSH terms “spine,” “infections,” “management,” and “diagnosis” were used.Results:Currently, the gold standard for diagnosis of postoperative spine infection is positive deep wound culture. Many of the current radiologic and laboratory tests can assist with the initial diagnosis and monitoring treatment response. Currently erythrocyte sedimentation rate, C-reactive protein, computed tomography scan, and magnetic resonance imaging with and without contrast are used in combination to establish diagnosis. Management of postoperative spine infection involves thorough surgical debridement and targeted antibiotic therapy.Conclusions:Postoperative spine infection is a not uncommon complication following surgery that may have devastating consequences for a patient’s short- and long-term health. A high index of suspicion is needed to make an early diagnosis.

Study Design:Meta-analysis.Objective:Proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK) is a complication of surgical management for adult spinal deformity with a multifactorial etiology. Many risk factors are controversial and their relative importance are not fully understood. We aimed to identify the surgical, radiographic, and patient-related risk factors associated with PJK and proximal junctional failure (PJF).Methods:A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and EMBASE. The inclusion criteria included prospective randomized control trials and prospective/retrospective cohort studies of adult patients with radiographic evidence of PJK, which was defined as a proximal junctional sagittal Cobb angle ≥10° and at least 10° greater than the preoperative measurement. Studies required a minimum of 10 patients and 12 months of follow-up.Results:A total of 14 unique studies, including 1908 patients were included. The pooled analysis showed significant differences between the PJK and non-PJK groups in age (weighted mean difference [WMD] −3.80; P = .03), prevalence of osteopenia/osteoporosis (odds ratio [OR] 1.99; P = .0004), preoperative sagittal vertical axis (SVA) (WMD −17.52; P = .02), preoperative lumbar lordosis (LL) (WMD −1.22; P = .002), pedicle screw instrumentation at the upper instrumented vertebra (UIV) (OR 1.67; P = .02), change in SVA (WMD −11.87; P = .01), fusion to sacrum/pelvis/ilium (OR 2.14; P < .00 001), change in LL (WMD −5.61; P = .01), and postoperative SVA (WMD −7.79; P = .008).Conclusions:Our meta-analysis suggests that age, osteopenia/osteoporosis, high preoperative SVA, high postoperative SVA, low preoperative LL, use of pedicle screws at the UIV, SVA change/correction, LL change/correction, and fusion to sacrum/pelvis/iliac region are risk factors for PJK.

No abstract

Study Design Systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Objective This study is a meta-analysis assessing the fusion rate and the clinical outcomes of cervical pseudarthrosis treated with either a posterior or a revision anterior approach. Methods A literature search of PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase was performed. Variables of interest included fusion rate and clinical success. The effect size based on logit event rate was calculated from the pooled results. The studies were weighted by the inverse of the variance, which included both within- and between-study error. The confidence intervals were reported at 95%. Heterogeneity was assessed using the Q statistic and I 2, where I 2 is the estimate of the percentage of error due to between-study variation. Results Sixteen studies reported fusion outcomes; 10 studies reported anterior and/or posterior results. The pooled fusion success was 86.4% in the anterior group and 97.1% in the posterior group (p = 0.028). The anterior group demonstrated significant heterogeneity with Q value of 34.2 and I 2 value of 73.7%; no heterogeneity was seen in the posterior group. The clinical outcomes were reported in 10 studies, with eight reporting results of anterior and posterior approaches. The pooled clinical success rate was 77.0% for anterior and 71.7% for posterior (p = 0.55) approaches. There was significant heterogeneity in both groups (I 2 16.1; 19.2). Conclusions Symptomatic cervical pseudarthrosis can be effectively managed with either an anterior or a posterior approach. The posterior approach demonstrates a significantly greater fusion rate compared with the anterior approach, though the clinical outcome does not differ between the two groups.

5.

Background: Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-TLIF) has comparable fusion rates and outcomes to the open approach, though many surgeons avoid the technique due to an initial learning curve. No current studies have examined the learning curve of MI-TLIF with respect to fluoroscopy time and exposure. Our objective with this retrospective review was to therefore use a repeatable mathematical model to evaluate the learning curve of MI-TLIF with a focus on fluoroscopy time and exposure. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of single level, primary fusions performed by a single surgeon during his initial experience with minimally invasive spine surgery. Chronologic case number was plotted against variables of interest, and learning was identified as the point at which the instantaneous rate of change of a curve fit to the data set equaled the average rate of change of the data set. Results: One hundred nine cases were reviewed. Proficiency in operative time was achieved at 38 cases with the first 38 requiring a median of 137 minutes compared to 104 minutes for the latter 71 cases (P , .0001). Mastery of fluoroscopy use occurred at case 51. The median fluoroscopy time for the first 51 cases was 2.8 minutes, which dropped to 2.1 minutes for cases 52 to 109 (P , .0001). The complication rate plateaued after 43 cases, with 3 of 11 total complications occurring in the latter 76 cases. Conclusions: Our results demonstrate the most gradual learning occurred with respect to fluoroscopy time and exposure, and operative time improved the quickest. Level of Evidence: IV. Clinical Relevance: These findings may guide spine surgeon education and training in minimally invasive techniques, and help determine safe case loads for radiation exposure during the initial learning phase of the technique. The model used to identify the learning curve can also be applied to several fields and surgical techniques.