Current advancements in spine surgery have led to a recent interest in regional anesthesia for spine surgery. Spinal anesthesia, epidural anesthesia, and their combination are commonly used modalities for regional anesthesia in spine surgeries. The successful use of regional anesthesia has led to the emergence of several new concepts such as awake spinal fusion and outpatient spinal surgery. Regarding analgesic techniques, several new modalities have been described recently such as erector spinae and thoracolumbar interfascial plane blocks. These regional analgesic modalities are aimed at decreasing perioperative pain and enhancing early recovery in patients undergoing spine surgery. This narrative review focuses on the techniques, indications and contraindications, benefits, and complications of regional anesthesia in the context of spine surgery.

This study was designed to systematically review and meta-analyze the functional and radiological outcomes between lateral and posterior approaches in adult degenerative scoliosis (ADS). Both lateral (lumbar, extreme, and oblique) and posterior interbody fusion (posterior lumbar and transforaminal) are used for deformity correction in patients with ADS with unclear comparison in this cohort of patients in the existing literature. A literature search using three electronic databases was performed to identify studies that reported outcomes of lateral (group L) and posterior interbody fusion (group P) in patients with ADS with curves of 10°–40°. Group P was further subdivided into minimally invasive surgery (MIS-P) and open posterior (Op-P) subgroups. Data on functional, radiological, and operative outcomes, length of hospital stay (LOHS), fusion rates, and complications were extracted and meta-analyzed using the random-effects model. A total of 18 studies (732 patients) met the inclusion criteria. No significant difference was found in functional and radiological outcomes between the two groups on data pooling. Total operative time in the MIS-P subgroup was less than that of group L (233.86 minutes vs. 401 minutes, p <0.05). The total blood loss in group L was less than that in the Op-P subgroup(477 mL vs. 1,325.6 mL, p <0.05). Group L had significantly less LOHS than the Op-P subgroup (4.15 days vs. 13.5 days, p <0.05). No significant difference was seen in fusion rates, but complications were seen except for transient sensorimotor weakness (group L: 24.3%, group P: 5.6%; p <0.05). Complications, such as postoperative thigh pain (7.7%), visceral injuries (2%), and retrograde ejaculation (3.7%), were seen only in group L while adjacent segment degeneration was seen only in group P (8.6%). Lateral approach has an advantage in blood loss and LOHS over the Op-P subgroup. The MIS-P subgroup has less operative time than group L, but with comparable blood loss and LOHS. No significant difference was found in functional, radiological, fusion rates, pseudoarthrosis, and complications, except for transient sensorimotor deficits. Few complications were approach-specific in each group.

Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Objectives: The need for definitive fusion for growing rod graduates is a controversial topic in the management of Early-onset scoliosis (EOS) patients. The authors performed a systematic review and meta-analysis on the available literature to evaluate the outcomes of growing rod graduates undergoing final fusion or observation with implants in-situ. Methods: An extensive literature search was carried out aimed at identifying articles reporting outcomes in growing rod graduates. Apart from the study characteristics and demographic details, the extracted data included Cobb’s correction, trunk height parameters, and revision rate. The extracted data was analyzed and forest plots were generated to draw comparisons between the observation and fusion groups. Results: Of the 11 included studies, 6 were case-control and 5 were case series. The authors did not find any significant difference between the 2 groups with respect to the pre-index and final Cobb’s correction, T1-T12 or T1-S1 height gain in either over-all, or sub-analysis with case-control studies. The meta-analysis showed a significantly higher revision rate in patients undergoing a definitive fusion procedure. Conclusion: The current analysis revealed comparable outcomes in terms of correction rate and gain in the trunk height but a lesser need of revisions in observation sub-group. The lack of good quality evidence and the need for prospective and randomized trials was also propounded by this review.

Over the years, a number of authors have used different working definitions of instability in tuberculosis of the spine (TB spine). However, no clear consensus exists to define instability in TB spine. The current systematic review addresses the question ‘What defines instability in TB spine’? A comprehensive medical literature search was carried out to identify all the studies which defined instability in the setting of spinal TB. The extracted data included the clinical, X-ray and CT or MRI-based definitions. The current review identified lesser age, junctional region of the spine, mechanical pain and ‘instability catch’, kyphotic deformity above 40 degrees, pan-vertebral or bilateral facetal involvement and multifocal contiguous disease involving more than three vertebrae as predictors for spinal instability in the dorso-lumbar spine. Cervical kyphosis more than 30 degrees and facetal or pan-vertebral involvement were found to be the factors used to define instability in subaxial cervical spine. With respect to C1–C2 TB spine, migration of the tip of the odontoid above the McRae or McGregor line or anterior translation of C1 over C2 were considered as determinants for instability. Although definitive conclusions could not be drawn due to lack of adequate evidence, the authors identified factors which may contribute towards instability in TB spine. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2021;6:202-210. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.6.200113