Review of the literature. Review the definition, etiology, incidence, and risk factors associated with as well as potential treatment options. The development of pathology at the mobile segment next to a lumbar or lumbosacral spinal fusion has been termed adjacent segment disease. Initially reported to occur rarely, it is now considered a potential late complication of spinal fusion that can necessitate further surgical intervention and adversely affect outcomes. MEDLINE literature search. The most common abnormal finding at the adjacent segment is disc degeneration. Biomechanical changes consisting of increased intradiscal pressure, increased facet loading, and increased mobility occur after fusion and have been implicated in causing adjacent segment disease. Progressive spinal degeneration with age is also thought to be a major contributor. From a radiographic standpoint, reported incidence during average postoperative follow-up observation ranging from 36 to 369 months varies substantially from 5.2 to 100%. Incidence of symptomatic adjacent segment disease is lower, however, ranging from 5.2 to 18.5% during 44.8 to 164 months of follow-up observation. The rate of symptomatic adjacent segment disease is higher in patients with transpedicular instrumentation (12.2–18.5%) compared with patients fused with other forms of instrumentation or with no instrumentation (5.2–5.6%). Potential risk factors include instrumentation, fusion length, sagittal malalignment, facet injury, age, and pre-existing degenerative changes. Biomechanical alterations likely play a primary role in causing adjacent segment disease. Radiographically apparent, asymptomatic adjacent segment disease is common but does not correlate with functional outcomes. Potentially modifiable risk factors for the development of adjacent segment disease include fusion without instrumentation, protecting the facet joint of the adjacent segment during placement of pedicle screws,fusion length, and sagittal balance. Surgical management, when indicated, consists of decompression of neural elements and extension of fusion. Outcomes after surgery, however, are modest.

The anterior approach to the cervical spine is commonly utilized for a variety of degenerative, traumatic, neoplastic, and infectious indications. While many potential complications overlap with those of the posterior approach, the distinct anatomy of the anterior neck also presents a unique set of hazards. We performed a systematic review of the literature to assess the etiology, presentation, natural history, and management of these complications. Following the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), a PubMed search was conducted to evaluate clinical studies and case reports of patients who suffered a complication of anterior cervical spine surgery. The search specifically included articles concerning adult human subjects, written in the English language, and published from 1989 to 2019. The PubMed search yielded 240 articles meeting our criteria. The overall rates of complications were as follows: dysphagia 5.3%, esophageal perforation 0.2%, recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy 1.3%, infection 1.2%, adjacent segment disease 8.1%, pseudarthrosis 2.0%, graft or hardware failure 2.1%, cerebrospinal fluid leak 0.5%, hematoma 1.0%, Horner syndrome 0.4%, C5 palsy 3.0%, vertebral artery injury 0.4%, and new or worsening neurological deficit 0.5%. Morbidity rates in anterior cervical spine surgery are low. Nevertheless, the unique anatomy of the anterior neck presents a wide variety of potential complications involving vascular, aerodigestive, neural, and osseous structures.

OBJECTIVE: Surgical robotics has demonstrated utility across the spectrum of surgery. Robotics in spine surgery, however, remains in its infancy. Here, the authors systematically review the evidence behind robotic applications in spinal instrumentation. METHODS: This systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Relevant studies (through October 2016) that reported the use of robotics in spinal instrumentation were identified from a search of the PubMed database. Data regarding the accuracy of screw placement, surgeon learning curve, radiation exposure, and reasons for robotic failure were extracted. RESULTS: Twenty-five studies describing 2 unique robots met inclusion criteria. Of these, 22 studies evaluated accuracy of spinal instrumentation. Although grading of pedicle screw accuracy was variable, the most commonly used method was the Gertzbein and Robbins system of classification. In the studies using the Gertzbein and Robbins system, accuracy (Grades A and B) ranged from 85% to 100%. Ten studies evaluated radiation exposure during the procedure. In studies that detailed fluoroscopy usage, overall fluoroscopy times ranged from 1.3 to 34 seconds per screw. Nine studies examined the learning curve for the surgeon, and 12 studies described causes of robotic failure, which included registration failure, soft-tissue hindrance, and lateral skiving of the drill guide. CONCLUSIONS: Robotics in spine surgery is an emerging technology that holds promise for future applications. Surgical accuracy in instrumentation implanted using robotics appears to be high. However, the impact of robotics on radiation exposure is not clear and seems to be dependent on technique and robot type.

Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-TLIF) is a relatively new surgical procedure that appears to minimize iatrogenic soft tissue and muscle injury. The authors describe a technique for MI-TLIF that permits the surgeon to reduce spondylolisthesis percutaneously. The results in 40 consecutive patients who underwent MI-TLIF for symptomatic spondylolisthesis utilizing this approach are reviewed. Thirty cases involved a degenerative spondylolisthesis while the remaining 10 were isthmic. The minimum follow-up was 24 months with a mean of 35 months. The mean preoperative Oswestry Disability Index score was 55, decreasing to a mean of 16 postoperatively. The mean leg and back pain visual analog scale scores were 65 and 52, respectively, improving to means of 8 and 15. Reduction of the spondylolisthesis was achieved in all cases, with a mean decrease in forward translation of 76%. The authors conclude that MI-TLIF for symptomatic spondylolisthesis appears to be an effective surgical option with results that compare favorably to open procedures.

OBJECTIVE: Spinal cord injury (SCI) results in significant morbidity and mortality. Improving neurological recovery by reducing secondary injury is a major principle in the management of SCI. To minimize secondary injury, blood pressure (BP) augmentation has been advocated. The objective of this study was to review the evidence behind BP management after SCI. METHODS: This systematic review was conducted following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Using the PubMed database, the authors identified studies that investigated BP management after acute SCI. Information on BP goals, duration of BP management, vasopressor selection, and neurological outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: Eleven studies that met inclusion criteria were identified. Nine studies were retrospective, and 2 were single-cohort prospective investigations. Of the 9 retrospective studies, 7 reported a goal mean arterial pressure (MAP) of higher than 85 mm Hg. For the 2 prospective studies, the MAP goals were higher than 85 mm Hg and higher than 90 mm Hg. The duration of BP management varied from more than 24 hours to 7 days in 6 of the retrospective studies that reported the duration of treatment. In both prospective studies, the duration of treatment was 7 days. In the 2 prospective studies, neurological outcomes were stable to improved with BP management. The retrospective studies, however, were contradictory with regard to the correlation of BP management and outcomes. Dopamine, norepinephrine, and phenylephrine were the agents that were frequently used to augment BP. However, more complications have been associated with dopamine use than with the other vasopressors. CONCLUSIONS: There are no high-quality data regarding optimal BP goals and duration in the management of acute SCI. Based on the highest level of evidence available from the 2 prospective studies, MAP goals of 85–90 mm Hg for a duration of 5–7 days should be considered. Norepinephrine for cervical and upper thoracic injuries and phenylephrine or norepinephrine for mid- to lower thoracic injuries should be considered.