A long-standing goal of spinal cord injury research is to develop effective repair strategies, which can restore motor and sensory functions to near-normal levels. Recent advances in clinical management of spinal cord injury have significantly improved the prognosis, survival rate and quality of life in patients with spinal cord injury. In addition, a significant progress in basic science research has unraveled the underlying cellular and molecular events of spinal cord injury. Such efforts enabled the development of pharmacologic agents, biomaterials and stem-cell based therapy. Despite these efforts, there is still no standard care to regenerate axons or restore function of silent axons in the injured spinal cord. These challenges led to an increased focus on another therapeutic approach, namely neuromodulation. In multiple animal models of spinal cord injury, epidural electrical stimulation of the spinal cord has demonstrated a recovery of motor function. Emerging evidence regarding the efficacy of epidural electrical stimulation has further expanded the potential of epidural electrical stimulation for treating patients with spinal cord injury. However, most clinical studies were conducted on a very small number of patients with a wide range of spinal cord injury. Thus, subsequent studies are essential to evaluate the therapeutic potential of epidural electrical stimulation for spinal cord injury and to optimize stimulation parameters. Here, we discuss cellular and molecular events that continue to damage the injured spinal cord and impede neurological recovery following spinal cord injury. We also discuss and summarize the animal and human studies that evaluated epidural electrical stimulation in spinal cord injury.

OBJECTIVE: Frailty is a clinical state of increased vulnerability due to age-associated decline and has been well established as a perioperative risk factor. Geriatric patients have a higher risk of frailty, higher incidence of brain cancer, and increased postoperative complication rates compared to nongeriatric patients. Yet, literature describing the effects of frailty on short- and long-term complications in geriatric patients is limited. In this study, the authors evaluate the effects of frailty in geriatric patients receiving cranial neurosurgery for a primary CNS neoplasm. METHODS: The authors conducted a retrospective cohort study of geriatric patients receiving cranial neurosurgery for a primary CNS neoplasm between 2010 and 2017 by using the Nationwide Readmission Database. Demographics and frailty were queried at primary admission, and readmissions were analyzed at 30-, 90-, and 180-day intervals. Complications of interest included infection, anemia, infarction, kidney injury, CSF leak, urinary tract infection, and mortality. Nearest-neighbor propensity score matching for demographics was implemented to identify nonfrail control patients with similar diagnoses and procedures. The analysis used Welch two-sample t-tests for continuous variables and chi-square test with odds ratios. RESULTS: A total of 6713 frail patients and 6629 nonfrail patients were identified at primary admission. At primary admission, frail geriatric patients undergoing cranial neurosurgery had increased odds of developing acute posthemorrhagic anemia (OR 1.56, 95% CI 1.23–1.98; p = 0.00020); acute infection (OR 3.16, 95% CI 1.70–6.36; p = 0.00022); acute kidney injury (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.07–1.62; p = 0.0088); urinary tract infection prior to discharge (OR 1.97, 95% CI 1.71–2.29; p < 0.0001); acute postoperative cerebral infarction (OR 1.57, 95% CI 1.17–2.11; p = 0.0026); and mortality (OR 1.64, 95% CI 1.22–2.24; p = 0.0012) compared to nonfrail geriatric patients receiving the same procedure. In addition, frail patients had a significantly increased inpatient length of stay (p < 0.0001) and all-payer hospital cost (p < 0.0001) compared to nonfrail patients at the time of primary admission. However, no significant difference was found between frail and nonfrail patients with regard to rates of infection, thromboembolism, CSF leak, dural tear, cerebral infarction, acute kidney injury, and mortality at all readmission time points. CONCLUSIONS: Frailty may significantly increase the risks of short-term acute complications in geriatric patients receiving cranial neurosurgery for a primary CNS neoplasm. Long-term analysis revealed no significant difference in complications between frail and nonfrail patients. Further research is warranted to understand the effects and timeline of frailty in geriatric patients.

Background: The first instance of a robotic-assisted surgery occurred in neurosurgery; however, it is now more common in other fields such as urology and gynecology. This study aims to characterize the prevalence of robotic surgery among current neurosurgery programs as well as identify trends in clinical trials pertaining to robotic neurosurgery. Methods: Each institution’s website was analyzed for the mention of a robotic neurosurgery program and procedures. The future potential of robotics in neurosurgery was assessed by searching for current clinical trials pertaining to neurosurgical robotic surgery. Results: Of the top 100 programs, 30 offer robotic cranial and 40 offer robotic spinal surgery. No significant differences were observed with robotic surgical offerings between geographic regions in the US. Larger programs (faculty size 16 or over) had 20 of the 30 robotic cranial programs (66.6%), whereas 21 of the 40 robotic spinal programs (52.5%) were at larger programs. An initial search of clinical trials revealed 223 studies, of which only 13 pertained to robotic neurosurgery. Spinal fixation was the most common intervention (six studies), followed by Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS, two studies), Cochlear implants (two studies), laser ablation (LITT, one study), and endovascular embolization (one study). Most studies had industry sponsors (9/13 studies), while only five studies had hospital sponsors. Conclusion: Robotic neurosurgery is still in its infancy with less than half of the top programs offering robotic procedures. Future directions for robotics in neurosurgery appear to be focused on increased automation of stereotactic procedures such as DBS and LITT and robot-assisted spinal surgery.

OBJECTIVE: Spinal robotics for thoracolumbar procedures, predominantly employed for the insertion of pedicle screws, is currently an emerging topic in the literature. The use of robotics in instrumentation of the cervical spine has not been broadly explored. In this review, the authors aimed to coherently synthesize the existing literature of intraoperative robotic use in the cervical spine and explore considerations for future directions and developments in cervical spinal robotics. METHODS: A literature search in the Web of Science, Scopus, and PubMed databases was performed for the purpose of retrieving all articles reporting on cervical spine surgery with the use of robotics. For the purposes of this study, randomized controlled trials, nonrandomized controlled trials, retrospective case series, and individual case reports were included. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was utilized to assess risk of bias of the studies included in the review. To present and synthesize results, data were extracted from the included articles and analyzed using the PyMARE library for effect-size meta-analysis. RESULTS: On careful review, 6 articles published between 2016 and 2022 met the inclusion/exclusion criteria, including 1 randomized controlled trial, 1 nonrandomized controlled trial, 2 case series, and 2 case reports. These studies featured a total of 110 patients meeting the inclusion criteria (mean age 53.9 years, range 29–77 years; 64.5% males). A total of 482 cervical screws were placed with the use of a surgical robot, which yielded an average screw deviation of 0.95 mm. Cervical pedicle screws were the primary screw type used, at a rate of 78.6%. According to the Gertzbein-Robbins classification, 97.7% of screws in this review achieved a clinically acceptable grade. The average duration of surgery, blood loss, and postoperative length of stay were all decreased in minimally invasive robotic surgery relative to open procedures. Only 1 (0.9%) postoperative complication was reported, which was a surgical site infection, and the mean length of follow-up was 2.7 months. No mortality was reported. CONCLUSIONS: Robot-assisted cervical screw placement is associated with acceptable rates of clinical grading, operative time, blood loss, and postoperative complications—all of which are equal to or improved relative to the metrics seen in the conventional use of fluoroscopy or computer-assisted navigation for cervical screw placement.