Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) are rapidly becoming integral components of modern healthcare, offering new avenues for diagnosis, treatment, and outcome prediction. This review explores their current applications and potential future in the field of spinal care. From enhancing imaging techniques to predicting patient outcomes, AI and ML are revolutionizing the way we approach spinal diseases. AI and ML have significantly improved spinal imaging by augmenting detection and classification capabilities, thereby boosting diagnostic accuracy. Predictive models have also been developed to guide treatment plans and foresee patient outcomes, driving a shift towards more personalized care. Looking towards the future, we envision AI and ML further ingraining themselves in spinal care with the development of algorithms capable of deciphering complex spinal pathologies to aid decision making. Despite the promise these technologies hold, their integration into clinical practice is not without challenges. Data quality, integration hurdles, data security, and ethical considerations are some of the key areas that need to be addressed for their successful and responsible implementation. In conclusion, AI and ML represent potent tools for transforming spinal care. Thoughtful and balanced integration of these technologies, guided by ethical considerations, can lead to significant advancements, ushering in an era of more personalized, effective, and efficient healthcare.

The number of spine surgeries using instrumentation has been increasing with recent advances in surgical techniques and spinal implants. Navigation systems have been attracting attention since the 1990s in order to perform spine surgeries safely and effectively, and they enable us to perform complex spine surgeries that have been difficult to perform in the past. Navigation systems are also contributing to the improvement of minimally invasive spine stabilization (MISt) surgery, which is becoming popular due to aging populations. Conventional navigation systems were based on reconstructions obtained by preoperative computed tomography (CT) images and did not always accurately reproduce the intraoperative patient positioning, which could lead to problems involving inaccurate positional information and time loss associated with registration. Since 2006, an intraoperative CT-based navigation system has been introduced as a solution to these problems, and it is now becoming the mainstay of navigated spine surgery. Here, we highlighted the use of intraoperative CT-based navigation systems in current spine surgery, as well as future issues and prospects.

To date, there have been little published data on surgical outcomes for patients with PD with thoracolumbar OVF. We conducted a retrospective multicenter study of registry data to investigate the outcomes of fusion surgery for patients with Parkinson’s disease (PD) with osteoporotic vertebral fracture (OVF) in the thoracolumbar junction. Retrospectively registered data were collected from 27 universities and their affiliated hospitals in Japan. In total, 26 patients with PD (mean age, 76 years; 3 men and 23 women) with thoracolumbar OVF who underwent spinal fusion with a minimum of 2 years of follow-up were included (PD group). Surgical invasion, perioperative complications, radiographic sagittal alignment, mechanical failure (MF) related to instrumentation, and clinical outcomes were evaluated. A control group of 296 non-PD patients (non-PD group) matched for age, sex, distribution of surgical procedures, number of fused segments, and follow-up period were used for comparison. The PD group showed higher rates of perioperative complications (p < 0.01) and frequency of delirium than the non-PD group (p < 0.01). There were no significant differences in the degree of kyphosis correction, frequency of MF, visual analog scale of the symptoms, and improvement according to the Japanese Orthopaedic Association scoring system between the two groups. However, the PD group showed a higher proportion of non-ambulators and dependent ambulators with walkers at the final follow-up (p < 0.01). A similar surgical strategy can be applicable to patients with PD with OVF in the thoracolumbar junction. However, physicians should pay extra attention to intensive perioperative care to prevent various adverse events and implement a rehabilitation regimen to regain walking ability.

Spinal epidermoid cysts are benign tumors, which are rarely seen as an intradural extramedullary spinal cord tumor in the conus medullaris region. Acquired spinal epidermoid cysts are mostly caused by iatrogenic procedures, such as lumbar puncture, and the majority of acquired spinal epidermoid cysts have been reported below the L1 level, because lumbar puncture is usually performed around the iliac crest. Here, we report an extremely rare case of an epidermoid cyst that occurred as an intradural and extramedullary spinal cord tumor attached to the conus medullaris after repetitive epidural anesthesia. A 67-year-old female presented with a low back pain and left sciatica. Although the patient had experienced occasional mild low back pain for several years, her low back pain markedly worsened 2 months before her visit, as well as newly developed left sciatica resulting in intermittent claudication. She had a history of several abdominal surgeries. All abdominal procedures were performed under general anesthesia with epidural anesthesia in her thoracolumbar spine. Magnetic resonance imaging of her lumbar spine demonstrated an intradural extramedullary spinal cord tumor at the T12–L1 level. Because her symptoms deteriorated, the tumor excision was performed using microscopy. Histological examination of the specimens demonstrated that the cyst walls lined with stratified squamous keratinizing epithelium surrounded by the outer layer of collagenous tissue with the absence of skin adnexa. A diagnosis of epidermoid cysts was confirmed. Her MRI showed complete resection of the tumor, and there was no recurrence at 2-year follow-up. In this case report, epidermoid cells might be contaminated into the spinal canal during repetitive epidural anesthesia. The patient was successfully treated by complete resection, and there was no recurrence at 2-year follow-up with a good clinical outcome. However, long-term follow-up is required for a potential risk of tumor recurrence.

Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) using the SEXTANT^® system (Medtronic) featured the first generation of commercially available percutaneous pedicle screw (PPS) system in 2001. The innovative system has since become standard instrumentation used worldwide, and PPS is now used for long-segment minimally invasive surgery (MIS) spinal fixation from the thoracic spine to the pelvis for pathological conditions. PPS systems have been developed for approximately 20 years for the purpose of improving minimally invasive techniques, safety of instrumentation, and ease of use. The third-generation PPS systems established the insertion technique, and the development of the fourth-generation PPS systems have made great strides in minimizing the number of steps in the operative procedure. In the future, PPS systems are expected to continue making use of the latest technological advancements and to develop further with the aim of ensuring greater safety, reducing operator stress, and preventing complications such as insertion errors and infection. In this review article, we describe the historical evolution from the first-generation PPS system to the current PPS systems used today.

Background and Objectives: The global trend toward increased protection of medical personnel from occupational radiation exposure requires efforts to promote protection from radiation on a societal scale. To develop effective educational programs to promote radiation protection, we clarify the actual status and stage of behavioral changes of spine surgeons regarding radiation protection. Materials and Methods: We used a web-based questionnaire to collect information on the actual status of radiation protection and stages of behavioral change according to the transtheoretical model. The survey was administered to all members of the Society for Minimally Invasive Spinal Treatment from 5 October to 5 November 2020. Results: Of 324 members of the Society for Minimally Invasive Spinal Treatment, 229 (70.7%) responded. A total of 217 participants were analyzed, excluding 12 respondents who were not exposed to radiation in daily practice. A trunk lead protector was used by 215 (99%) participants, while 113 (53%) preferred an apron-type protector. Dosimeters, thyroid protector, lead glasses, and lead gloves were used by 108 (50%), 116 (53%), 82 (38%), and 64 (29%) participants, respectively. While 202 (93%) participants avoided continuous irradiation, only 120 (55%) were aware of the source of the radiation when determining their position in the room. Regarding the behavioral change stage of radiation protection, 134 (62%) participants were in the action stage, while 37 (17%) had not even reached the contemplation stage. Conclusions: We found that even among the members of the Society for Minimally Invasive Spinal Treatment, protection of all vulnerable body parts was not fully implemented. Thus, development of educational programs that cover the familiar risks of occupational radiation exposure, basic protection methods in the operating room, and the effects of such protection methods on reducing radiation exposure in actual clinical practice is warranted.