Objective: The use of social media applications to disseminate information has substantially risen in recent decades. Spine and back pain-related hashtags have garnered several billion views on TikTok. As such, these videos, which share experiences, offer entertainment, and educate users about spinal surgery, have become increasingly influential. Herein, we assess the quality of spine surgery content TikTok from providers and patients.Methods: Fifty hashtags encompassing spine surgery (“#spinalfusion,” “#scoliosissurgery,” and “#spinaldecompression”) were searched using TikTok’s algorithm and included. Two independent reviewers rated the quality of each video via the DISCERN questionnaire. Video metadata (likes, shares, comments, views, length) were all collected; type of content creator (musculoskeletal, layperson) and content category (educational, patient experience, entertainment) were determined.Results: The overall DISCERN score was, on average, 24.4. #Spinalfusion videos demonstrated greater engagement, higher average likes (p = 0.02), and more comments (p < 0.001) compared to #spinaldecompression and #scoliosissurgery. #Spinaldecompression had the highest DISCERN score (p < 0.001), likely explained by the higher percentage of videos that were educational (p < 0.001) and created by musculoskeletal (MSK) professionals (p < 0.001). Compared to laypersons, MSK professionals had significantly higher quality videos (p < 0.001). Similarly, the educational category demonstrated higher quality videos (p < 0.001). Video interaction trended lower with MSK videos and educational videos had the lowest interaction of the content categories (likes: p = 0.023, comments: p = 0.005).Conclusion: The quality of spine surgery videos on TikTok is low. As the influence of the new social media landscape governs how the average person consumes information, MSK providers should participate in disseminating high-quality content.

Study Design.: Retrospective cohort. Objective.: To compare navigation and robotics in terms of clinical outcomes after minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-TLIF). Summary of Background Data.: Although robotics has been shown to have advantages like reduced radiation exposure, greater screw size, and slightly better accuracy over navigation, none of the studies has compared these two modalities in terms of clinical outcomes. Methods.: Patients who underwent single-level MI-TLIF using robotics or navigation and had a minimum of 1-year follow-up were included. The robotics and navigation groups were compared for improvement in patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), minimal clinically important difference, patient-acceptable symptom state, response on the global rating change scale, and screw-related complication and reoperation rates. Results.: A total of 278 patients (143 robotics, 135 navigation) were included. There was no significant difference between the robotics and navigation groups in the baseline demographics, operative variables, and preoperative PROMs. Both groups showed significant improvement in PROMs at below six and six months or above, with no significant difference in the magnitude of improvement between the two groups. Most patients achieved minimal clinically important difference and patient-acceptable symptom state and reported feeling better on the global rating change scale, with no significant difference in the proportions between the robotics and navigation groups. The screw-related complication and reoperation rates also showed no significant difference between the two groups. Conclusions.: Robotics did not seem to lead to significantly better clinical outcomes compared with navigation following MI-TLIF. Although the clinical outcomes may be similar, robotics offers the advantages of reduced radiation exposure, greater screw size, and slightly better accuracy over navigation. These advantages should be considered when determining the utility and cost-effectiveness of robotics in spine surgery. Larger multicenter prospective studies are required in the future to further investigate this subject.

Objective: Despite growing interest in cervical disc replacement (CDR) for conditions such as cervical radiculopathy, limited data exists describing the impact of obesity on early postoperative outcomes and complications. These data are especially important as nearly half of the adult population in the United States is expected to become obese (body mass index [BMI] ≥ 30 kg/m2) by 2030. The goal of this study was to compare the demographics, perioperative variables, and complication rates following CDR.Methods: The 2005–2020 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program datasets were queried for patients who underwent primary 1- or 2-level CDR. Patients were divided into 3 cohorts: Nonobese (BMI: 18.5–29.9 kg/m2), Obese class-I (BMI: 30–34.9 kg/m2), Obese class-II/III (BMI ≥ 35 kg/m2). Morbidity was defined as the presence of any complication within 30 days postoperatively. Rates of 30-day readmission, reoperation, morbidity, individual complications, length of stay, frequency of nonhome discharge disposition were collected.Results: A total of 5,397 patients were included for analysis: 3,130 were nonobese, 1,348 were obese class I, and 919 were obese class II/III. There were more 2-level CDRs performed in the class II/III cohort compared to the nonobese group (25.7% vs. 21.5%, respectively; p < 0.05). Class-II/III had more nonhome discharges than class I and nonobese (2.1% vs. 0.5% vs. 0.7%, respectively; p < 0.001). Readmission rates differed as well (nonobese: 0.5%, class I: 1.1%, class II/III: 2.1%; p < 0.001) with pairwise significance between class II/II and nonobese. Class II/III obesity was an independent risk factor for both readmission (odds ratio [OR], 3.32; p = 0.002) and nonhome discharge (OR, 2.51; p = 0.02). Neither 30-day reoperation nor morbidity rates demonstrated significance. No mortalities were reported.Conclusion: Although obese class-II/III were risk factors for 30-day readmission and nonhome discharge, there was no significant difference in reoperation rates or morbidity. CDR procedures can continue to be safely preformed independent of obesity status.