Traumatic spinal cord injury (TSCI) is a debilitating disease that poses significant functional and economic burden on both the individual and societal levels. Prognosis is dependent on the extent of the spinal injury and the severity of neurological dysfunction. If not treated rapidly, patients with TSCI can suffer further secondary damage and experience escalating disability and complications. It is important to quickly assess the patient to identify the location and severity of injury to make a decision to pursue a surgical and/or conservative management. However, there are many conditions that factor into the management of TSCI patients, ranging from the initial presentation of the patient to long-term care for optimal recovery. Here, we provide a comprehensive review of the etiologies of spinal cord injury and the complications that may arise, and present an algorithm to aid in the management of TSCI.

Purpose: The role of robotics in spine surgery remains controversial, especially for scoliosis correction surgery. This study aims to assess the safety and efficacy of robotic-assisted (RA) surgery specifically for scoliosis surgery by comparing RA to both navigation systems (NS) and conventional freehand techniques (CF). Methods: As per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, a systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted via an electronic search of the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). All papers comparing RA to either NS or CF for posterior spinal fusion in scoliosis were included. Fixed and random effects models of analysis were utilised based on analysis heterogeneity. Results: 10 observational studies were included in total. RA had significantly greater odds of accurate pedicle screw placement relative to both NS (OR = 2.02, CI = 1.52–2.67, p < 0.00001) and CF (OR = 3.06, CI = 1.79–5.23, p < 0.00001). The downside of RA was the significantly greater operation duration relative to NS (MD = 10.74, CI = 3.52–17.97, p = 0.004) and CF (MD = 40.27, CI = 20.90, p < 0.0001). Perioperative outcomes including estimated blood loss, radiation exposure, length of hospital stay, cobb angle correction rate, postoperative SRS score, VAS pain score, JOA score, as well as rates of neurological injury and revision surgery, were comparable between the groups (p > 0.05). Conclusion: RA offers significantly greater pedicle screw placement accuracy relative to NS and CF, however, surgery can take longer. In terms of perioperative outcomes, all three techniques are comparable.

Background: There is a great unmet clinical need to provide patients undergoing spinal surgery and their caregivers with ongoing, high-quality care before and after surgery in an efficiency-focused health care environment. Objective: The objective of this study is to design, develop, and evaluate the acceptability and feasibility of a novel planning-, outcomes-, and analytics-based smartphone app called ManageMySurgery (MMS) in patients undergoing elective spine surgery (MMS-Spine). Methods: The development process of the MMS app was conducted over 2 sequential stages: (1) an evidence-based intervention design with refinement from surgeon and patient feedback and (2) feasibility testing in a clinical pilot study. We developed a novel, mobile-based, Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act–compliant platform for interventional and surgical procedures. It is a patient-centric mobile health app that streamlines patients’ interactions with their care team. MMS divides the patient journey into phases, making it feasible to provide customized care pathways that meet patients’ unique needs. Patient-reported outcomes are easily collected and conform to the National Institutes of Health Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) standard. Results: We tested the feasibility of the MMS-Spine app with patients undergoing elective spine surgery at a large academic health system. A total of 47 patients undergoing elective spine surgery (26 cervical spine and 21 lumbar spine surgeries) downloaded and used MMS-Spine to navigate their surgical journey, quantify their baseline characteristics and postoperative outcomes, and provide feedback on the utility of the app in preparing for and recovering from their spinal surgery. The median age was 59.0 (range 33-77) years, 22 of the 47 patients (47%) were women, and 26 patients (55%) had commercial insurance. Of the 47 patients, a total of 33 (70%) logged in on an iOS device, 11 (23%) on an Android device, and 3 (6%) on a computer or tablet. A total of 17 of the 47 patients (36%) added a caregiver, of which 7 (41%) logged in. The median number of sign-ins was 2. A total of 38 of 47 patients (81%) completed their baseline preoperative PROMIS-29 outcomes, and 14 patients (30%) completed at least one PROMIS-29 survey during the postoperative period. Of the 24 patients who completed the MMS survey, 21 (88%) said it was helpful during preparation for their procedure, 16 (67%) said it was helpful during the postoperative period, and 23 (96%) said that they would recommend MMS to a friend or family member. Conclusions: We used a patient-centered approach based on proven behavior change techniques to develop a comprehensive smartphone app for patients undergoing elective spine surgery. The optimized version of the app is ready for formal testing in a larger randomized clinical study to establish its cost-effectiveness and effect on patients’ self-management skills and long-term outcomes.

Cervical endoscopic spine surgery is rapidly evolving and gaining popularity for the treatment of cervical radiculopathy and myelopathy. This approach significantly reduces muscular damage and blood loss by minimizing soft tissue stripping, leading to less postoperative pain and a faster postoperative recovery. As scientific evidence accumulates, the efficacy and safety of cervical endoscopic spine surgery are continually affirmed. Both anterior and posterior endoscopic approaches have surfaced as viable alternative treatments for various cervical spine pathologies. Newer techniques, such as endoscopic-assisted fusion, the anterior transcorporeal approach, and unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression, have been developed to enhance clinical outcomes and broaden surgical indications. Despite its advantages, this approach faces challenges, including a steep learning curve, increased radiation exposure for both surgeons and patients, and a relative limitation in addressing multi-level pathologies. However, the future of cervical endoscopic spine surgery is promising, with potential enhancements in clinical outcomes and safety on the horizon. This progress is fueled by integrating advanced imaging and navigation technologies, applying regional anesthesia for improved and facilitated postoperative recovery, and incorporating cutting-edge technologies, such as augmented reality. With these advancements, cervical endoscopic spine surgery is poised to broaden its scope in treating cervical spine pathologies while maintaining the benefits of minimized tissue damage and rapid recovery.

The transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) has seen significant evolution since its early inception, reflecting advancements in surgical techniques, patient safety, and outcomes. Originally described as an improvement over the posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF), the TLIF began as an open surgical procedure, that notably reduced the need for the extensive neural retractation that hindered the PLIF. In line with the broader practice of surgery, trending toward minimally invasive access, the TLIF was followed by the development of the minimally invasive TLIF (MIS-TLIF), a technique that further decreased tissue trauma and postoperative complications. Subsequent advancements, including Trans-Kambin’s Triangle TLIF (percLIF) and transfacet LIF, have continued to refine surgical access, minimize surgical footprint, and reduce the risk of injury to the patient. The latest evolution, as we will describe it, the patient-specific TLIF, is a culmination of the aforementioned adaptations and incorporates advanced imaging and segmentation technologies into perioperative planning, allowing surgeons to tailor approaches based on individual patient anatomy and pathology. These developments signify a shift towards more precise methods in spine surgery. The ongoing evolution of the TLIF technique illustrates the dynamic nature of surgery and emphasizes the need for continued adaptation and refinement.