Introduction: Persistent (patent) foramen ovale (PFO) is a recognized risk for decompression sickness (DCS) in divers, which may be mitigated by conservative diving or by PFO closure. Our study aimed to compare the effectiveness of these two risk mitigation interventions. Methods: This was a prospective study on divers who tested positive for PFO or an atrial septal defect (ASD) and either decided to continue diving without closure ('conservative group'), or to close their PFO/ASD and continue diving ('closure group'). Divers’ characteristics, medical history, history of diving and history of DCS were reported at enrollment and annually after that. The outcome measures were the incidence rate of DCS, frequency and intensity of diving activities, and adverse events of closure. Results: Divers in both groups dived less and had a lower incidence rate of confirmed DCS than before the intervention. In the closure group (n = 42) the incidence rate of confirmed DCS decreased significantly. Divers with a large PFO experienced the greatest reduction in total DCS. In the conservative group (n = 23), the post-intervention decrease in confirmed DCS incidence rate was not significant. Of note, not all divers returned to diving after closure. Seven subjects reported mild adverse events associated with closure; one subject reported a serious adverse event. Conclusions: PFO closure should be considered on an individual basis. In particular, individuals who are healthy, have a significant DCS burden, a large PFO or seek to pursue advanced diving may benefit from closure.

Selective flexion deformity of the middle and ring fingers resembling a mild type of Volkmann’s contracture resulted from Cysticercus cellulosa infection within the deep flexor muscle of the forearm in a middle-aged woman. Excision of the fibrotic segment of the muscle and tenodesis of all the flexor profundus tendons restored normal range of motion to these fingers. Vascular compromise in addition to the inflammatory response to the infection were considered causes for the deformity. There is no previous report of this kind in the literature.

Antibiotic bone cement (ABC) is an effective tool for the prophylaxis and treatment of osteomyelitis due to the controlled, sustained release of local antibiotics. ABC has been proven to be effective in the orthopedic fields of arthroplasty and extremity trauma, but the adoption of ABC in spine surgery is limited. The characteristics of ABC make it an optimal solution for treating vertebral osteomyelitis (VO), a serious complication following spine surgery, typically caused by bacterial and sometimes fungal and parasitic pathogens. VO can be devastating, as infection can result in pathogenic biofilms on instrumentation that is dangerous to remove. New techniques, such as kyphoplasty and novel vertebroplasty methods, could amplify the potential of ABC in spine surgery. However, caution should be exercised when using ABC as there is some evidence of toxicity to patients and surgeons, antibiotic allergies, bone cement structural impairment, and possible development of antibiotic resistance. The purpose of this article is to describe the basic science of antibiotic cement utilization and review its usage in spine surgery.

Surgical robots were invented in the 1980s, and since then, robotic-assisted surgery has become commonplace. In the field of spine surgery, robotic assistance is utilized mainly to place pedicle screws, and multiple studies have demonstrated that robots can increase the accuracy of screw placement and reduce radiation exposure to the patient and the surgeon. However, this may be at the cost of longer operative times, complications, and the risk of errors in mapping the patient’s anatomy.