Background: Percutaneous pedicle screw (PPS) placement is a key step in several minimally invasive spinal surgery (MISS) procedures. Traditional technique for PPS makes use of C-arm fluoroscopy assistance (FA). More recently, newer intraoperative imaging techniques have been developed for PPS, including CT-guided navigation (CTNav). The aim of this study was to compare FA and CTNav techniques for PPS with regard to accuracy, complications, and radiation dosage. Materials and methods: A total of 192 patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis and canal stenosis who underwent MISS posterior fusion ± interbody fusion through transforaminal approach (TLIF) were retrospectively reviewed. Pedicle screws were placed percutaneously using either standard C-arm fluoroscopy guidance (FA group) or CT navigation (CTNav group). Intraoperative effective dose (ED, mSv) was measured. Screw placement accuracy was assessed postoperatively on a CT scan using Gertzbein and Robbins classification (grades A–E). Oswestry disability index (ODI) and visual analog scale (VAS) scores were compared in both groups before and after surgery. Results: A total of 101 and 91 procedures were performed with FA (FA group) and CTNav approach (CTNav group), respectively. Median age was 61 years in both groups, and the most commonly treated level was L4–L5. Median ED received from patients was 1.504 mSv (0.494–4.406) in FA technique and 21.130 mSv (10.840–30.390) in CTNav approach (p < 0.001). Percentage of grade A and B screws was significantly higher for the CTNav group (96.4% versus 92%, p < 0.001), whereas there were 16 grade E screws in the FA group and 0 grade E screws in the CTNav group (p < 0.001). A total of seven and five complications were reported in the FA and CTNav group, respectively (p = 0.771). Conclusions: CTNav technique increases accuracy of pedicle screw placement compared with FA technique without affecting operative time. Nevertheless, no significant difference was noted in terms of reoperation rate due to screw malpositioning between CTNav and FA techniques. Radiation exposure of patients was significantly higher with CTNav technique. Level of Evidence: Level 3.

Background/Objectives: Lumbar spine surgery has undergone significant technological transformation in recent years, driven by the goals of minimizing invasiveness, improving precision, and enhancing clinical outcomes. Emerging tools—including robotics, augmented reality, computer-assisted navigation, and artificial intelligence—have complemented the evolution of minimally invasive surgical (MIS) approaches, such as endoscopic and lateral interbody fusions. Methods: This systematic review evaluates the literature from February 2020 to February 2025 on technological and procedural innovations in LSS. Eligible studies focused on degenerative lumbar pathologies, advanced surgical technologies, and reported clinical or perioperative outcomes. Randomized controlled trials, comparative studies, meta-analyses, and large case series were included. Results: A total of 32 studies met the inclusion criteria. Robotic-assisted surgery demonstrated high accuracy in pedicle screw placement (~92–94%) and reduced intraoperative blood loss and radiation exposure, although long-term clinical outcomes were comparable to conventional techniques. Intraoperative navigation improved instrumentation precision, while AR enhanced ergonomic workflow and reduced surgeon distraction. AI tools showed promise in surgical planning, guidance, and outcome prediction but lacked definitive evidence of clinical superiority. MIS techniques—including endoscopic discectomy and MIS-TLIF—offered reduced blood loss, shorter hospital stays, and faster recovery, with equivalent pain relief, fusion rates, and complication profiles compared to open procedures. Lateral and oblique approaches (XLIF/OLIF) further optimized alignment and indirect decompression, with favorable perioperative metrics. Conclusions: Recent innovations in lumbar spine surgery have enhanced technical precision and perioperative efficiency without compromising patient outcomes. While short-term benefits are clear, long-term clinical advantages and cost-effectiveness require further investigation. Integration of robotics, navigation, AI, and MIS into spine surgery reflects an ongoing shift toward personalized, data-driven, and less invasive care.

Background: Minimally invasive spine surgery is a field of active and intense research. Image-guided percutaneous pedicle screw (PPS) placement is a valid alternative to the standard free-hand technique, thanks to technological advancements that provide potential improvement in accuracy and safety. Herein, we describe the clinical results of a surgical technique exploiting integration of neuronavigation and intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IONM) for minimally invasive PPS. Materials and Methods: An intraoperative-computed tomography (CT)-based neuronavigation system was combined with IONM in a three-step technique for PPS. Clinical and radiological data were collected to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the procedure. The accuracy of PPS placement was classified according to the Gertzbein–Robbins scale. Results: A total of 230 screws were placed in 49 patients. Only two screws were misplaced (0.8%); nevertheless, no clinical sign of radiculopathy was experienced by these patients. The majority of the screws (221, 96.1%) were classified as grade A according to Gertzbein–Robbins scale, seven screws were classified as grade B, one screw was classified as grade D, and one last screw was classified as grade E. Conclusions: The proposed three-step, navigated, percutaneous procedure offers a safe and accurate alternative to traditional techniques for lumbar and sacral pedicle screw placement. Level of Evidence Level 3. Trial registration Not applicable.

Background/Objectives: Lumbar disk herniation (LDH) significantly affects quality of life due to lower back and radiating leg pain. Surgical intervention, such as discectomy, is effective for symptom relief when conservative measures fail; however, psychological factors like anxiety, depression, and maladaptive coping strategies may negatively impact surgical outcomes. This study aims to assess the role of preoperative psychological evaluations in predicting postoperative recovery and to identify key psychological and functional predictors of surgical success. Methods: A prospective study was conducted on 888 patients undergoing microdiscectomy for LDH at Mater Olbia Hospital between December 2020 and December 2023. Preoperative evaluations included the Visual Analog Scale, Symptom Checklist 90-R, Oswestry Disability Index, and Short Form 36. Logistic regression models and ROC curve analysis were used to identify significant predictors of outcomes and evaluate model accuracy. Results: Preoperative pain levels and emotional well-being emerged as the strongest determinants of postoperative improvement in the Oswestry Disability Index. The predictive model demonstrated high specificity (90.2%) in identifying patients likely to benefit from surgery. Clinically significant improvements were achieved by 69% of patients, highlighting the importance of psychological and functional assessments. Conclusions: Preoperative psychological assessment is critical in predicting outcomes of lumbar disk herniation surgery. Addressing psychological factors preoperatively enhances recovery, supports personalized treatment planning, and improves patient education. These findings advocate for an integrated care model that considers both physical and psychological health, optimizing surgical outcomes and patient satisfaction.

Background/Objectives: Lumbar disc herniation, a complex challenge in spinal health, significantly impacts individuals across diverse age groups. This article delves into the intricacies of this condition, emphasising the pivotal role of anatomical considerations in its understanding and management. Additionally, lumbar discectomy might be considered an “easy” surgery; nevertheless, it carries significant risks. The aim of the study was to present a groundbreaking “three-step approach” with some anatomical insight derived from our comprehensive clinical experiences, designed to systematise the surgical approach and optimise the outcomes, especially for young spine surgeons. We highlighted the purpose of the study and introduced our research question(s) and the context surrounding them. Methods: This retrospective study involved patients treated for lumbar disc herniation at a single institution. The patient demographics, surgical details, and postoperative assessments were meticulously recorded. All surgeries were performed by a consistent surgical team. Results: A total of 847 patients of the 998 patients initially included completed the follow-up period. A three-step approach was performed for every patient. The recurrence rate was 1.89%. Furthermore, the incidence of lumbar instability and the need for reoperation were carefully examined, presenting a holistic view of the outcomes. Conclusions: The three-step approach emerged as a robust and effective strategy for addressing lumbar disc herniation. This structured approach ensures a safe and educational experience for young spinal surgeons.

Background: Anterior cervical discectomy and interbody fusion (ACDF) may be performed with different kinds of stand-alone cages. Tantalum and polyetheretherketone (PEEK) are two of the most commonly used materials in this procedure. Few comparisons between different stand-alone implants for ACDF have been reported in the literature. Methods: We performed a comparison between patients who underwent ACDF with either a porous tantalum or a PEEK stand-alone cage, in two spine surgery units for single-level disc herniation. Clinical outcome [Neck Disability Index (NDI), Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for pain, Short Form-36 (SF-36)] and radiological outcome (lordosis, fusion and subsidence) were measured before surgery and at least one year after surgery in both groups. Results: Thirty-eight patients underwent ACDF with a porous tantalum cage, and thirty-one with a PEEK cage. The improvement of NDI and SF-36 was significantly superior in the PEEK group (p = 0.002 and p = 0.049 respectively). Moreover, the variation of the Cobb angle for the cervical spine was significantly higher in the PEEK group (p < 0.001). Conclusions: In a retrospective analysis of two groups of patients with at least one year of follow-up, a stand-alone PEEK cage showed superior clinical results, with improved cervical lordosis, compared to a stand-alone porous tantalum cage. Further studies are needed to confirm these data.