Background and Objectives: Advances in virtual reality (VR), augmented reality (AR), and mixed reality (MR) technologies have resulted in their increased application across many medical specialties. VR’s main application has been for teaching and preparatory roles, while AR has been mostly used as a surgical adjunct. The objective of this study is to discuss the various applications and prospects for VR, AR, and MR specifically as they relate to spine surgery. Materials and Methods: A systematic review was conducted to examine the current applications of VR, AR, and MR with a focus on spine surgery. A literature search of two electronic databases (PubMed and Scopus) was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). The study quality was assessed using the MERSQI score for educational research studies, QUACS for cadaveric studies, and the JBI critical appraisal tools for clinical studies. Results: A total of 228 articles were identified in the primary literature review. Following title/abstract screening and full-text review, 46 articles were included in the review. These articles comprised nine studies performed in artificial models, nine cadaveric studies, four clinical case studies, nineteen clinical case series, one clinical case–control study, and four clinical parallel control studies. Teaching applications utilizing holographic overlays are the most intensively studied aspect of AR/VR; the most simulated surgical procedure is pedicle screw placement. Conclusions: VR provides a reproducible and robust medium for surgical training through surgical simulations and for patient education through various platforms. Existing AR/MR platforms enhance the accuracy and precision of spine surgeries and show promise as a surgical adjunct.

Objetivo: presentar a los clínicos la evidencia que soporta los procesos más seguros y efectivos en la inserción y el mantenimiento del catéter venoso central (CVC), como estrategia en la prevención de las infecciones del torrente sanguíneo asociadas a catéter. Materiales y métodos: a partir de preguntas clínicas dirigidas a mejorar la seguridad y efectividad de los procesos de inserción y mantenimiento de catéter venoso, en los momentos clave, se hicieron búsquedas de literatura en las bases de datos Medline vía PubMed, Embase, Central y Lilacs. Se utilizó la metodología de revisión sistemática rápida de la literatura. Los estudios identificados fueron evaluados desde el punto de vista de la calidad con las herramientas para estudios cualitativos, cuantitativos y revisiones sistemáticas del Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI). Las guías de práctica clínicas fueron evaluadas con el instrumento AGREE II. La evidencia se presenta como recomendaciones clínicas basadas en la evidencia, a las cuales se les dio gradación, según la metodología del JBI. Resultados: se presentan 12 resúmenes clínicos que contienen la evidencia relacionada con el uso seguro y efectivo del catéter venoso central en cuanto a: las indicaciones, la inserción del catéter en venas centrales y en inserción periférica (PICC), la valoración prequirúrgica, el uso de analgesia, la preparación del campo, la selección entre CVC o PICC, el cuidado y mantenimiento de CVC, la prevención de complicaciones y consideraciones generales en el uso de catéter venoso central (CVC) en el paciente oncológico y en nutrición parenteral. Conclusiones: se presentan las recomendaciones para el uso seguro y efectivo de los catéteres de acceso venoso central con relación a los procesos de inserción y mantenimiento de CVC en el modelo de resúmenes basados en la evidencia. Es necesario hacer evaluación de la implementación de los mismos en resultados en salud en las instituciones donde se desarrollen.

The accurate and safe positioning of cervical pedicle screws is crucial. While augmented reality (AR) use in spine surgery has previously demonstrated clinical utility in the thoracolumbar spine, its technical feasibility in the cervical spine remains less explored. The objective of this study was to assess the precision and safety of AR-assisted pedicle screw placement in the cervical spine. In this experimental study, five cadaveric cervical spine models were instrumented from C3 to C7 by five different spine surgeons. The navigation accuracy and clinical screw accuracy were evaluated. Post-procedural CT scans were evaluated for clinical accuracy by two independent neuroradiologists using the Gertzbein-Robbins scale. Technical precision was assessed by calculating the angular trajectory (°) and linear screw tip (mm) deviations in the axial and sagittal planes from the virtual pedicle screw position as recorded by the AR-guided platform during the procedure compared to the actual pedicle screw position derived from post-procedural imaging. A total of forty-one pedicle screws were placed in five cervical cadavers, with each of the five surgeons navigating at least seven screws. Gertzbein-Robbins grade of A or B was achieved in 100% of cases. The mean values for tip and trajectory errors in the axial and sagittal planes between the virtual versus actual position of the screws was less than 3 mm and 30°, respectively (p<0.05). None of the cervical screws violated the cortex by more than 2 mm or displaced neurovascular structures. AR-assisted cervical pedicle screw placement in cadavers demonstrated clinical accuracy comparable to existing literature values for image-guided navigation methods for the cervical spine. This study provides technical and clinical accuracy data that supports clinical trialing of AR-assisted subaxial cervical pedicle screw placement.

Background and Objectives: Augmented reality head-mounted display (AR-HMD) is a novel technology that provides surgeons with a real-time CT-guided 3-dimensional recapitulation of a patient’s spinal anatomy. In this case series, we explore the use of AR-HMD alongside more traditional robotic assistance in surgical spine trauma cases to determine their effect on operative costs and perioperative outcomes. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed trauma patients who underwent pedicle screw placement surgery guided by AR-HMD or robotic-assisted platforms at an academic tertiary care center between 1 January 2021 and 31 December 2022. Outcome distributions were compared using the Mann–Whitney U test. Results: The AR cohort (n = 9) had a mean age of 66 years, BMI of 29.4 kg/m², Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) of 4.1, and Surgical Invasiveness Index (SII) of 8.8. In total, 77 pedicle screws were placed in this cohort. Intra-operatively, there was a mean blood loss of 378 mL, 0.78 units transfused, 398 min spent in the operating room, and a 20-day LOS. The robotic cohort (n = 13) had a mean age of 56 years, BMI of 27.1 kg/m², CCI of 3.8, and SII of 14.2. In total, 128 pedicle screws were placed in this cohort. Intra-operatively, there was a mean blood loss of 432 mL, 0.46 units transfused units used, 331 min spent in the operating room, and a 10.4-day LOS. No significant difference was found between the two cohorts in any outcome metrics. Conclusions: Although the need to address urgent spinal conditions poses a significant challenge to the implementation of innovative technologies in spine surgery, this study represents an initial effort to show that AR-HMD can yield comparable outcomes to traditional robotic surgical techniques. Moreover, it highlights the potential for AR-HMD to be readily integrated into Level 1 trauma centers without requiring extensive modifications or adjustments.