Background: Instrumented spinal fusions can be used in the treatment of vertebral fractures, spinal instability, and scoliosis or kyphosis. Construct-level selection has notable implications on postoperative recovery, alignment, and mobility. This study sought to project future trends in the implementation rates and associated costs of single-level versus multilevel instrumentation procedures in US Medicare patients aged older than 65 years in the United States. Methods: Data were acquired from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services from January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2019. Procedure costs and counts were abstracted using Current Procedural Terminology codes to identify spinal level involvement. The Prophet machine learning algorithm was used, using a Bayesian Inference framework, to generate point forecasts for 2020 to 2050 and 95% forecast intervals (FIs). Sensitivity analyses were done by comparing projections from linear, log-linear, Poisson and negative-binomial, and autoregressive integrated moving average models. Costs were adjusted for inflation using the 2019 US Bureau of Labor Statistics' Consumer Price Index. Results: Between 2000 and 2019, the annual spinal instrumentation volume increased by 776% (from 7,342 to 64,350 cases) for single level, by 329% (from 20,319 to 87,253 cases) for two-four levels, by 1049% (from 1,218 to 14,000 cases) for five-seven levels, and by 739% (from 193 to 1,620 cases) for eight-twelve levels (P < 0.0001). The inflation-adjusted reimbursement for single-level instrumentation procedures decreased 45.6% from $1,148.15 to $788.62 between 2000 and 2019, which is markedly lower than for other prevalent orthopaedic procedures: total shoulder arthroplasty (−23.1%), total hip arthroplasty (−39.2%), and total knee arthroplasty (−42.4%). By 2050, the number of single-level spinal instrumentation procedures performed yearly is projected to be 124,061 (95% FI, 87,027 to 142,907), with associated costs of $93,900,672 (95% FI, $80,281,788 to $108,220,932). Conclusions: The number of single-level instrumentation procedures is projected to double by 2050, while the number of two-four level procedures will double by 2040. These projections offer a measurable basis for resource allocation and procedural distribution.

Chordomas are rare sarcomas arising from notochordal tissue and occur most commonly in the spine. The standard of care for chordomas without evidence of metastatic disease generally consists of en bloc resection followed by adjuvant radiotherapy. However, long-term (20-year) survival rates are approximately 30%. Chordomas are generally considered as chemo resistant. Therefore, systemic therapies have rarely been employed. Novel immunotherapies, including antibody therapy and tumor vaccines, have shown promise in early trials, leading to extended progression-free survival and symptom relief. However, the outcomes of larger trials using these vectors are heterogeneous. The aim of this review is to summarize novel chordoma treatments in immune-targeted therapies. The current merits, trial outcomes, and toxicities of these novel immune and targeted therapies, including those targeting vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) targets and the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), will be discussed.

Pedicle screw fixation is a technique used to provide rigid fixation in thoracolumbar spine surgery. Safe intraosseous placement of pedicle screws is necessary to provide optimal fixation as well as to avoid damage to adjacent anatomic structures. Despite the wide variety of techniques available, none thus far has been able to fully eliminate the risk of malpositioned screws. Intraoperative 3-dimensional navigation (I3DN) was developed to improve accuracy in the placement of pedicle screws. To our knowledge, no previous studies have investigated whether infection rates are higher with I3DN. A single-institution, retrospective study of patients age > 18 undergoing thoracolumbar fusion and instrumentation was carried out and use of I3DN was recorded. The I3DN group had a significantly greater rate of return to the operating room for culture-positive incision and drainage (17 (4.1%) vs. 1 (0.6%), p = 0.025). In multivariate analysis, the use of I3DM did not reach significance with an OR of 6.49 (0.84–50.02, p = 0.073). Post-operative infections are multifactorial and potential infection risks associated with I3DN need to be weighed against the safety benefits of improved accuracy of pedicle screw positioning.

Chronic back and leg pain are leading causes of disability worldwide. The purpose of this study was to compare the care in a unidisciplinary (USC) versus multidisciplinary (MSC) spine clinic, where patients are evaluated by different specialists during the same office visit. Adult patients presenting with a chief complaint of back and/or leg pain between June 2018 and July 2019 were assessed for eligibility. The main outcome measures included the first treatment recommendations, the time to treatment order, and the time to treatment occurrence. A 1:1 propensity score-matched analysis was performed on 874 patients (437 in each group). For all patients, the most common recommendation was physical therapy (41.4%), followed by injection (14.6%), and surgery (9.7%). Patients seen in the MSC were more likely to be recommended injection (p < 0.001) and less likely to be recommended surgery as first treatment (p = 0.001). They also had significantly shorter times to the injection order (log-rank test, p = 0.004) and the injection occurrence (log-rank test, p < 0.001). In this study, more efficient care for patients with back and/or leg pain was delivered in the MSC setting, which was evidenced by the shorter times to the injection order and occurrence. The impact of the MSC approach on patient satisfaction and health-related quality-of-life outcome measures warrants further investigation.

Patient-specific technologies within the field of adult spinal deformity (ASD) aid surgeons in pre-surgical planning, accurately help identify anatomical landmarks, and can project optimal post-surgical sagittal alignment. This narrative review aims to discuss the current uses of patient-specific technologies in ASD and identify new innovations that may very soon be integrated into patient care. Pre-operatively, machine learning or artificial intelligence helps surgeons to simulate post-operative alignment and provide information for the 3D-printing of pre-contoured rods and patient-specific cages. Intraoperatively, robotic surgery and intraoperative guides allow for more accurate positioning of implants. Implant materials are being developed to allow for better osseointegration and patient outcome monitoring. Despite the significant promise of these technologies, work still needs to be performed to ensure their accuracy, safety, and cost efficacy.

Study Design: Systematic review. Objective: To evaluate perioperative and clinical outcomes after open versus endoscopic lumbar decompression in patients with obesity. Summary of Background Data: Obesity is associated with increased technical difficulty and perioperative morbidity in lumbar spine surgery. Endoscopic spine surgery (ESS) may reduce soft tissue disruption and wound morbidity, but comparative data in obese patients remain limited. Materials and Methods: A systematic review was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science were searched from inception through January 21, 2026. Studies were included if they enrolled adult patients with obesity undergoing lumbar decompression without fusion for degenerative pathology and reported at least one operative or perioperative outcome. Pediatric patients, nonlumbar or nondegenerative procedures, fusion-only cohorts, and nonprimary literature were excluded. Demographics, operative outcomes, complications, reoperation, and patient-reported outcomes were extracted and synthesized qualitatively. Results: Fourteen studies were included after screening 667 titles/abstracts and 93 full texts; 11 primary clinical studies informed the results synthesis. Two studies directly compared endoscopic and open decompression in obese patients. Ma and colleagues reported lower estimated blood loss after unilateral biportal endoscopic decompression compared with open surgery and shorter hospitalization. Castel and colleagues reported shorter hospitalization after full endoscopic lumbar discectomy compared with open surgery, although operative time was longer in the endoscopic cohort. Complications included surgical site infection, durotomy, nerve root injury, and recurrent disc herniation, with low event rates. BMI-stratified studies showed comparable pain and disability improvement between obese and nonobese patients. Conclusion: Based on limited comparative evidence from two studies, endoscopic decompression in obese patients was associated with similar clinical improvement and potential perioperative advantages compared with open surgery, including lower reported blood loss and shorter length of stay. Limitations include retrospective designs, heterogeneous techniques, only two comparative studies, and inconsistent reporting. These findings should be considered preliminary, and prospective comparative studies are needed. Level of Evidence: Level III.