Introduction: Artificial intelligence (AI) is revolutionizing neurosurgery by enhancing diagnostic precision, surgical planning, and postoperative management. However, its integration raises ethical concerns related to bias, privacy, accountability, and the potential dehumanization of healthcare. This review focuses on navigating these challenges while maximizing AI’s potential in improving patient care. Methodology: A narrative review was conducted by identifying studies from PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar databases. The search utilized the following keywords: “artificial intelligence,” “neurosurgery,” “machine learning,” “data privacy,” “robotic surgery,” “ethics,” and “bias.” The review primarily focused on issues of dataset bias, data privacy, and the need for transparency and accountability in clinical decision-making. Results and critical insights: AI significantly improves diagnostic accuracy and the management of neurological conditions; however, it also poses risks, such as exacerbating healthcare disparities and compromising patient data security. Recommended strategies include the development of ethical frameworks, inclusion of diverse datasets, and fostering surgeon–AI collaboration to ensure equitable outcomes. Conclusion: AI holds immense promise in enhancing neurosurgical diagnostics, surgical planning, and postoperative care. Nonetheless, its responsible integration demands robust ethical and regulatory frameworks that prioritize patient safety, transparency, and equity. Interdisciplinary collaboration and continuous real-world validation remain essential to address ongoing clinical and ethical challenges as AI technologies evolve.

Background: Epilepsy is a chronic neurological disorder characterized by recurrent seizures, affecting approximately 50 million individuals globally. While conventional antiseizure medications (ASMs) control seizures in 70–80% of patients, about 30% experience drug resistance or intolerable side effects, necessitating alternative approaches. Objective: To critically compare the efficacy, safety, and accessibility of conventional and emerging therapies for epilepsy, particularly in the context of treatment-resistant cases and global disparities in care. Methods: This narrative review synthesized evidence from 120 peer-reviewed articles published between 2015 and 2025. Literature was retrieved from PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Scopus using predefined search terms related to epilepsy treatments. Comparative analysis included therapeutic mechanisms, clinical outcomes, and implementation barriers. Results: Conventional treatments such as phenytoin, valproate, levetiracetam, surgical resection, ketogenic diet, and vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) offer 70–80% seizure control. However, emerging therapies are gaining prominence. Cannabidiol (CBD) demonstrates a 30–50% seizure reduction, while responsive neurostimulation (RNS) achieves 50–70% efficacy, especially in drug-resistant epilepsy. Despite these advancements, a 75% treatment gap persists in low-income countries due to limited resources, access, and trained personnel. Conclusion: Emerging therapies hold promise for managing refractory epilepsy, yet global disparities limit their reach. Precision medicine strategies must be coupled with efforts to improve access in underserved regions. This review provides practical insights for personalized care and advocates for increased investment in equitable treatment infrastructure.

Background: Lucid dreaming (LD), which involves being aware of and controlling one’s dreams, is of particular interest in the study of consciousness and has potential therapeutic applications. In this narrative review, we highlight the neurobiological aspects of LD, specifically its mechanisms associated with the activation of prefrontal and parietal areas, increased gamma oscillations, and the influence of cholinergic and dopaminergic signaling, primarily during rapid eye movement (REM) sleep. Objective: To evaluate human data on brain mechanisms and clinical effects, synthesizing the neurobiological foundations and therapeutic possibilities of LD, including remarkably controlled lucid dreams. Methods: A narrative review of peer-reviewed research involving clinical groups [e.g., post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), chronic nightmares, Parkinson’s] and healthy individuals (18–45) was synthesized. Objective lucidity verification [vented eye movements, electroencephalography (EEG)/functional magnetic resonance imaging] was a requirement for inclusion criteria. Neurobiological indicators (gamma, alpha, beta waves, and prefrontal cortex/parietal activation), therapeutic benefits (e.g., frequency of nightmares, PTSD and anxiety scores, motor and cognitive gains), and safety and ethical considerations (dissociation and sleep disruption) were among the outcomes evaluated. Results: LD demonstrates efficacy in modulating nightmares, improving cognitive functions, and potentially alleviating some symptoms in PTSD and neurodegenerative disorders, albeit with methodological constraints. Developments in portable EEG and virtual reality headsets will refine LD research, while interdisciplinary approaches are necessary to address potential risks of dissociation and privacy concerns. Conclusion: Although evidence remains preliminary, LD shows promise as a therapeutic remedy for PTSD and anxiety symptoms, including a reduction in nightmares. It combines neuroscience and self-agency, highlighting the need for more funding and public awareness campaigns to harness its scientific and clinical prospects. Larger randomized trials with a variety of groups and standardized induction techniques are necessary to verify long-term efficacy and safety.

Background: Neurodegenerative diseases (NDs) such as Parkinson’s disease (PD), Alzheimer’s disease (AD), amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), Huntington’s disease (HD) are set apart by progressive neuronal loss and concomitant functional decline. Traditional therapies are equipped with only symptomatic relief, devoid of neurorestorative properties. Stem-cell-based therapies have the potential to revolutionize neurological care by replenishing lost cells, mitigating inflammation, and fostering a neuroprotective environment. Objectives: This narrative review aims to appraise the treatment potential of various stem cell types in managing NDs, highlighting their functional pathways, delivery methods, and current experimental validation. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was carried out based on data retrieved from PubMed, The Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Thirty-one studies that fulfill PICO criteria and only English-language publications are incorporated in this review. No part of the study design, data collection, analysis, or interpretation was conducted using artificial intelligence. Results: Stem cells, including embryonic stem cells, mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs), induced pluripotent stem cells, and neural stem cells, possess distinctive regenerative properties. MSC-derived exosomes can traverse the blood–brain barrier and improve nerve cell longevity. Administration routes such as intravenous, intranasal, and direct brain transplantation are being studied. Neurodegenerative conditions such as PD, AD, HD, and ALS have been widely studied for therapeutic benefits. Conclusion: Regardless of their potential, stem cell therapies raise health risks, including neoplastic growth and immunological incompatibility, alongside bioethical issues. Developments in genetic modification, nanotechnology, and preconditioning strategies are being analyzed to optimize outcomes. Long-term research, harmonization of protocols, and extended patient follow-up are essential for the safe and effective development of medical applications.

Objective: To synthesize recent advancements in metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC) treatment, evaluating their efficacy in improving neurological function, pain relief, survival, and quality of life. Background: MSCC is an oncologic emergency caused by the progression of cancer to the spine and is prevalent in approximately 3–5% of all cancer patients, with a relatively higher incidence of breast, prostate, and lung cancers. MSCC can lead to irreversible paralysis due to loss of vital sensory and motor functions, thus requiring an immediate diagnosis and treatment. Methods: A systematic PubMed search identified studies published over the past 5 years focusing on advancements in MSCC treatment. Applying the PICO criteria, 132 articles were retrieved, of which 38 met the inclusion criteria after rigorous screening. Result: Effective care of MSCC includes high-dose corticosteroids, surgery, and radiation therapy. Advancements such as robot-assisted and minimally invasive surgeries enhance surgical outcomes. Emerging technologies, including deep learning models for early detection and automated MRI analysis, improve diagnostic accuracy. Personalized medicine techniques, such as next-generation sequencing, enable the development of customized therapies tailored to individual tumor characteristics. Innovations such as bioengineered implants provide better imaging compatibility and reduce radiation scattering. Proton therapy delivers targeted radiation with minimal harm to adjacent tissues. Conclusion: Prompt, multimodal treatment is necessary, including corticosteroids, surgery, and radiation therapy to reduce symptoms and enhance patient outcomes. Despite advancements, challenges such as delayed diagnosis and limited access to specialized treatments persist. Precision medicine, artificial intelligence–based diagnostics, and easier access to clinical trials should be the main areas of future development. Preventing irreparable neurological impairments and improving patient quality of life requires a focus on palliative care and early intervention. Integrating innovative therapies with comprehensive supportive care in a patient-centered study is essential for enhancing neurological function, pain control, and overall quality of life.