Background: Many surgeons believe that the use of a 3D-printed drill guide template shortens operative time and reduces intraoperative blood loss compared with those of the free-hand technique. In this study, we investigated the effects of a drill guide template on the accuracy of pedicle screw placement (the screw placed completely in the pedicle), operative time, and intraoperative blood loss. Materials/Methods: We systematically searched the major databases, such as Medline via PubMed, EMBASE, Ovid, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar, regarding the accuracy of pedicle screw placement, operative time, and intraoperative blood loss. The χ² test and I² statistic were used to examine heterogeneity. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to calculate the accuracy rate of pedicle screw placement, and weighted mean differences (WMDs) with 95% CIs were utilized to express operative time and intraoperative blood loss. Results: This meta-analysis included 13 studies (seven randomized controlled trials and six prospective cohort studies) involving 446 patients and 3375 screws. The risk of research bias was considered moderate. Operative time (WMD = − 20.75, 95% CI − 33.20 ~ − 8.29, P = 0.001) and intraoperative blood loss (WMD = − 106.16, 95% CI − 185.35 ~ − 26.97, P = 0.009) in the thoracolumbar vertebrae, evaluated by a subgroup analysis, were significantly different between groups. The 3D-printed drill guide template has advantages over the free-hand technique and improves the accuracy of pedicle screw placement (OR = 2.88; 95% CI, 2.39~3.47; P = 0.000). Conclusion: The 3D-printed drill guide template can improve the accuracy rate of pedicle screw placement, shorten operative time, and reduce intraoperative blood loss.

There are few studies to investigate changes in imaging parameters of Modic changes (MCs). The imaging studies examining the distinctions in the lumbar sagittal parameters between MCs and lumbar disc degeneration (LDD) are still lacking. The purpose of this study was to identify the differences in the lumbar sagittal parameters among patients for LDD with/without Modic type 2 change (MII). A total of 208 patients with lumbar degenerative disease from January 2017 to August 2018 volunteered for this study. Sixty-two patients with MII were used as the MC group. The other 146 patients served as the disc degeneration (DD) group. The DD scores and sagittal parameters were measured on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and X-ray by using Surgimap software. The prevalence of MII for patients with degenerative lumbar diseases in this study was 29.81%, primarily located at L5/S1. There were significant differences in lumbar lordosis (LL) and sacral slope (SS) between these two groups (P < 0.05). Similarly, the significant decrease in intervertebral height index (IHI) was found at L3-S1 in the MC group, compared with the DD group (P < 0.05). However, a significant difference in intervertebral angle (IVA) was observed only at L5/S1 (P < 0.05). The MC group had the smaller endplate concave angle (ECA) than the DD group from L3 caudal endplate to S1 cranial endplate (P < 0.05). MII has a severe radiographic representation in the process of lumbar degeneration than patients without MII, and the overconcentration of load caused by the smaller LL, SS, and IVA may be a reasonable explanation to answer why MCs are more common at the L5/S1.

In absence of uniform therapeutic recommendations, knowledge of the available treatment options for Modic changes (MCs) patients and their safety and effectiveness would be crucial and significant for clinicians and such patients. The aim of this study was to provide a systematic review of available studies on non-surgical treatments of MCs. We performed a systematic review of multiple electronic databases including PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure for the period until 31st August 2021 to search for studies on non-surgical treatments for MCs in accordance with the guidance of the Cochrane Handbook. Potential studies were screened by their titles and abstracts. The methodological quality of the included studies was independently evaluated by two authors. Final recommendations for the included interventions were developed based on grades of recommendations. The narrative format was adopted to synthesize the findings of the present work. Fifth studies involving a total of 1147 patients were identified for this systematic review. The results of this review demonstrated that spinal manipulation has been suggested as an alternative option for patients with MCs. However, there was insufficient evidence to support that patients with MCs can benefit from the medication and wearing the rigid lumbar brace. Moreover, the rationale and safety for the use of antibiotics in such patients remain highly controversial. Low evidence revealed that exercise therapy might decrease pain intensity only for special subgroups of MCs patients. There is not yet enough evidence to suggest that non-surgical treatments are useful for patients with MCs. Further high-quality, multicenter trials are required to validate the effectiveness of these non-surgical treatments.

Purpose: This study employed meta-analysis to evaluate whether the application of intraoperative wound irrigation (IOWI) with povidone-iodine (PI) in spine surgery effectively reduces the incidence of postoperative surgical site infection (SSI). Methods: The present study was conducted strictly following the methodological guidance provided by the Cochrane Handbook. The protocol of this work was registered with PROSPERO. Two researchers independently conducted electronic searches in Medline via PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. The bias risk of each included study was evaluated by two assessors. We performed statistical analysis on the dataset using STATA software. Results: Fourteen studies involving a total of 6777 patients were included in the present work. The risk of bias of six included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was considered as low-to-moderate risk, and the quality scores of the eight included retrospective cohort studies were rated as high quality. The results of this meta-analysis indicated a significant difference in the incidence of postoperative SSI between the two groups (RR = 0.29, 95% CI: (0.18, 0.47)). Moreover, patients who underwent IOWI with PI had lower rates of deep and superficial infections after spine surgery compared with the controlled group (superficial infection: RR = 0.28, 95%CI: (0.14, 0.54); Deep infection: RR = 0.24, 95%CI: (0.10, 0.60)). The sensitivity analysis results indicated good robustness and high evidence strength after data consolidation in the overall rate of postoperative SSI and the incidence of deep/superficial infection. Conclusions: IOWI with PI solution during spinal surgery can effectively reduce the incidence of postoperative SSI.