Dynamic tracking of spinal instrumentation could facilitate real-time evaluation of hardware integrity and in so doing alert patients/clinicians of potential failure(s). Critically, no method yet exists to continually monitor the integrity of spinal hardware and by proxy the process of spinal arthrodesis; as such hardware failures are often not appreciated until clinical symptoms manifest. Accordingly, herein, we report on the development and engineering of a bio-adhesive metal detector array (BioMDA), a potential wearable solution for real-time, non-invasive positional analyses of osseous implants within the spine. The electromagnetic coupling mechanism and intimate interfacial adhesion enable the precise sensing of the metallic implants position without the use of radiation. The customized decoupling models developed facilitate the precise determination of the horizontal and vertical positions of the implants with incredible levels of accuracy (e.g., <0.5 mm). These data support the potential use of BioMDA in real-time/dynamic postoperative monitoring of spinal implants.

BACKGROUND: This study retrospectively compared short-term clinical outcomes and complications of minimally invasive surgery transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion(MIS-TLIF)and endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion(Endo-LIF))for two-segmental lumbar degenerative disease, aiming to guide spine surgeons in selecting surgical approaches.
METHODS: From January 2019 to December 2023, 30 patients were enrolled,15 in the MIS-TLIF group and 15 in the Endo-LIF group. All patients were followed up for more than 3 months after surgery and the following information was recorded: (1)surgery time, difference in hemoglobin between preoperative and postoperative, surgical costs, first time out of bed after operation, postoperative hospitalization time, postoperative complication; (2) ODI score (The Oswestry Disability Index), leg and back VAS score (Visual Analogue Scale), and lumbar vertebra JOA score (Japanese Orthopaedic Association Scores); (3) MacNab score at final follow-up to assess clinical outcome, CT to evaluate lumbar fusion.
RESULTS: There were significant differences between the two groups regarding operation time and cost, with the MIS-TLIF group performing significantly better. Intraoperative bleeding was considerably less in the Endo-LIF group compared to the MIS-TLIF group. However, there were no significant differences in the time of the first postoperative ambulation, postoperative hospitalization time, and postoperative complications. There was no significant difference in preoperative VAS, ODI, and JOA between the two surgical groups There were no significant differences in VAS(leg), ODI, and JOA scores between the two groups before and at 1 day,7 days, 1 month, 3 months and final follow-up. However, at 1 day postoperatively, the VAS( back)score in the Endo-LIF group was lower than that in the MIS-TLIF group, and the difference was statistically significant. At the final follow-up, all patients achieved grade III and above according to the Bridwell criteria, and there was no significant difference between the two surgical groups compared to each other. According to the MacNab score at the final follow-up, the excellent rate was 80.00% in the Endo-LIF group and 73.33% in the MIS-TLIF group, with no significant difference between the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference in short-term efficacy and safety between Endo-LIF and MIS-TLIF for two-segment degenerative lumbar diseases. MIS-TLIF has a shorter operative time and lower costs, while Endo-LIF causes less tissue damage, blood loss, and early postoperative pain, aiding long-term recovery. Both MIS-TLIF and Endo-LIF are promising for treating two-segment lumbar degenerative disease. The choice of a surgical procedure depends on the patient\'s financial situation, their ability to tolerate surgery, and the surgeon\'s expertise.

BACKGROUND: Posterolateral decompression and fusion with internal fixation is a commonly used surgical approach for treating degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (DLSS). This study aims to evaluate the impact of preserving a portion of the unilateral facet joint during decompression on surgical outcomes and long-term recovery in patients.
METHODS: This study analyzed 73 patients with DLSS accompanied by bilateral lower limb neurological symptoms who underwent single-level L4/5 posterolateral decompression and fusion surgery from January 2022 to March 2023. Patients were categorized into two groups based on the type of surgery received: Group A comprised 31 patients who underwent neural decompression without facet joint preservation, while Group B consisted of 42 patients who underwent neural decompression with preservation of partial facet joints on one side. Regular follow-up evaluations were conducted, including clinical and radiological assessments immediately postoperatively, and at 3 and 12 months thereafter. Key patient information was documented through retrospective chart reviews.
RESULTS: Most patients in both groups experienced favorable surgical outcomes. However, four cases encountered complications. Notably, during follow-up, Group B demonstrated superior 1-year postoperative interbody fusion outcomes (P < 0.05), along with a trend towards less interbody cage subsidence and slower postoperative intervertebral disc height loss. Additionally, Group B showed significantly reduced postoperative hospital stay (P < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Under strict adherence to surgical indications, the posterior lateral lumbar fusion surgery, which preserves partial facet joint unilaterally during neural decompression, can offer greater benefits to patients.

BACKGROUND: Large spacers offer numerous advantages such as higher fusion rates and lower subsidence rates. However, due to the anatomical constraints of the approach, the use of large spacers in biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion(BE-TLIF) necessitates an additional incision and special instruments for spacer implantation leading to less frequent use.
METHODS: This study has refined several techniques within BE-TLIF. We insert the cage and impact the cage transverse with a special design instrument in the same working portal. This allows for the use of large spacers during BE-TLIF procedures without the need for an auxiliary cage-inserting incision.
CONCLUSIONS: The technique is a straightforward, safe, and minimally invasive method for inserting large cages in the treatment of lumbar instability.

BACKGROUND: Spondylolisthesis is a prevalent condition in the lumbar spine that can cause low back pain, leg pain, neurogenic claudication, and impact health-related quality of life in symptomatic individuals.
OBJECTIVE: to assess the results of minimally invasive TLIF (MIS-TLIF) versus open-TLIF and the impact of correcting spino-pelvic parameters on the Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) in patients with low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis. The primary objective was to compare the effectiveness of both methods in correcting spinopelvic parameters. The secondary objectives involved comparing clinical improvement, operating time, blood loss, complications, and postoperative hospital stays between the two procedures.
METHODS: Seventy-two patients with low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis were enrolled in this retrospective cohort-control study, with a minimum follow-up period of 18 months. Disability was assessed using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), while back and leg discomfort were rated using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for each patient. The measurements comprised the sacral slope (SS), pelvic tilt (PT), pelvic incidence (PI), and Meyerding slip grades. We measured lumbar lordosis (LL), and segmental lordosis.
RESULTS: The seventy-two patients were 60 female and 12 males. There was no statistically significant difference in the duration of operation between the two groups. In the MIS group, there was a notable reduction in blood loss, higher radiation exposure, and a shorter hospital stay (P < 0.001). The back VAS showed more favorable outcomes in the MIS-TLIF, while the leg VAS showed better results in the Open-TLIF in the early outcome. Both procedures significantly reduced leg and back pain VAS scores and ODI, with no notable difference between the two groups at the final follow-up. Post-surgery, the pelvic incidence (PI) and lumbar lordosis (LL) matched properly in all patients, showing a rise in LL and sacral slope along with a decrease in pelvic tilt.
CONCLUSIONS: Both open-TLIF and MIS-TLIF are effective methods for correcting spino-pelvic parameters and improving HRQoL in patients with low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis. The rapid improvement in back pain experienced by these patients favored the use of MIS-TLIF. However, the cost-effectiveness of this approach must be carefully evaluated.

BACKGROUND: The prognosis of surgically treated subjects with early onset scoliosis (EOS) into adulthood has been lacking. We aimed to investigate the patients\' perspectives on satisfaction with surgical treatment.
METHODS: We included all surgical candidates with EOS who had undergone index spinal surgery for scoliosis correction between 2009 and 2013. The minimum duration of postoperative follow-up was 10 years at the time of survey completion. Three questionnaires were used in this study, comprising the revised Scoliosis Research Society questionnaire (SRS-22r), the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS-29), and the World Health Organization Quality of Life (WHOQOL-BREF). Measures of treatment satisfaction were retrieved from SRS-22r.
RESULTS: There were 29 participants who completed the survey, and thereby included in the study (i.e., a response rate of 43% and a dropout rate of 6%). Amongst them, 14, 11, and 4 individuals received posterior spinal fusion (PSF), magnetically controlled growing rods (MCGR), and traditional growing rods, respectively. The average duration after the index spinal surgery was 12.6 ± 2.2 years. Our findings revealed that self-image (across all treatment groups), sleep disruption (only in PSF), and social aspects (in both PSF and MCGR) were significantly worse when compared to the normative values. According to the multivariable linear regression model (R-square = 0.690, p < .001), an increase in SRS-22r mental health (p = .008) and PROMIS-29 social participation scores (p = .004) corresponded to 0.511 and 0.055 points increases in satisfaction. Every unit increase in PROMIS-29 fatigue (p = .043) and WHOQOL-BREF physical domain scores (p = .007) was in conjunction with 0.019 and 0.040 points decreases in satisfaction. SRS-22r self-image (p = .056) and WHOQOL-BREF environmental domain scores (p = .076) were included in the model but did not reach statistical significance.
CONCLUSIONS: To improve the long term quality of life in surgical candidates with EOS, we demonstrated that mental health, social participation, fatigue, and physical health were significant factors associated with treatment satisfaction. Interestingly, demographic and radiographic parameters did not have a significant effect in our cohort.

OBJECTIVE: Oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) still has a steep learning curve that many spinal surgeons who want to develop are hesitant. The purpose of this study is to provide reference for beginners through the comparative analysis of the application of two kinds of retraction devices in the early stage of learning curve.
METHODS: We prospectively included the first 60 patients with lumbar degenerative diseases treated with OLIF by a surgeon in our department. According to the application of different retraction devices during the operation, the patients were divided into hook retractor group and tubular retractor group. The clinical effects and complications of the two groups were compared.
RESULTS: The average age of hook retractor group was 62 years old, the average age of tubular retractor group was 65 years old. There was no significant difference in age, sex, operative segment, follow-up time and blood loss between the two groups. The operation time in hook retractor group was less than that in tubular retractor group. The incidence of complications in hook retractor group (11.8%) was significantly lower than that in tubular retractor group (38.5%).
CONCLUSIONS: The tubular retractor group has a higher risk of neurovascular injury in the initial stage of learning, as well as the risk of vertebral fracture. In contrast, the hook retractor group has the advantages of simple method, high fault tolerance and relatively low incidence of complications. Therefore, we believe that the application of hook retractor in the early stage of OLIF learning curve is easier to increase the operator\'s confidence and make OLIF more acceptable.

Spinal alignment analysis play an important role in evaluating patients and planning surgical corrections for adult spinal deformity. The history of these parameters is relatively short with the first parameter, the Cobb angle, introduced in 1948 as part of an effort to improve scoliosis evaluation. New developments in the field were limited for nearly 30 years before better imaging technology encouraged new theories and later data about spinal alignment and the relationship between the spine and pelvis. These efforts would ultimately contribute to the creation of foundational spinal alignment parameters, including pelvic incidence, pelvic tilt, and sacral slope. By the 1990s, spinal alignment had become a sustained area of investigation for spinal surgeons and researchers. Novel alignment parameters have since been introduced as our knowledge has evolved and has allowed for valuable research that demonstrates the clinical and surgical value of alignment measurement. This manuscript will explore the history of spinal alignment analysis over the decades.

Spinal fusion is a prevalent surgical intervention for degenerative spinal diseases, with increasing demand driven by ageing populations. The coexistence of multiple chronic conditions, termed multimorbidity, often complicates surgical outcomes, making advanced bone grafts crucial for successful fusions. This paper reviews the development, clinical application, and controversies surrounding the use of recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 (rhBMP-2) in spinal fusion surgeries. A comprehensive narrative review was conducted, focusing on literature from January 1980 to January 2024, sourced from PubMed and Google Scholar. Studies included those examining rhBMP-2 specifically in spinal fusion contexts, excluding other bone morphogenetic proteins (BMPs) and non-spinal applications. This review presents an overarching synopsis of rhBMP-2, its development history and clinical efficacy, the emergence of side effects, and evolving patterns of clinical use. As discussed in this review, clinical practice has adjusted usage and dosages to mitigate adverse effects, yet the need for safer delivery mechanisms persists. rhBMP-2 remains a potent osteoinductive agent with comparable fusion success, as measured by radiographic fusion and good clinical outcomes, to autologous grafts but poses unique risks. This review sets out how further research is essential to optimise the delivery of rhBMP-2 to reduce side effects. Enhanced understanding and innovation of spatio-temporal presentation relative to endogenous BMP could significantly improve patient outcomes in spinal fusion surgeries. The review contributes to the growing body of literature on the use of rhBMP-2 in spine surgery and discusses changing patterns of clinical use over time.

OBJECTIVE: To optimize cervical vertebral bone quality (C-VBQ) score and explore its effectiveness in predicting cage subsidence in Anterior Cervical Corpectomy and Fusion (ACCF) and identify a new method for evaluating subsidence without different equipment and image scale interference.
METHODS: Collecting demographic, imaging, and surgical related information. Measuring Cage Subsidence with a new method. Multifactorial logistic regression was used to identify risk factors associated with subsidence. Pearson\'s correlation was used to determine the relationship between C-VBQ and computed tomography (CT) Hounsfield units (HU). The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to assess C-VBQ predictive ability. Correlations between demographics and C-VBQ scores were analyzed using linear regression models.
RESULTS: 92 patients were included in this study, 36 (39.1%) showed subsidence with a C-VBQ value of 2.05 ± 0.45, in the no-subsidence group C-VBQ Value was 3.25 ± 0.76. The multifactorial logistic regression showed that C-VBQ is an independent predictor of cage subsidence with a predictive accuracy of 93.4%. Pearson\'s correlation analysis showed a negative correlation between C-VBQ and HU values. Linear regression analysis showed a positive correlation between C-VBQ and cage subsidence. Univariate analyses showed that only age was associated with C-VBQ.
CONCLUSIONS: The C-VBQ values obtained using the new measurements independently predicted postoperative cage subsidence after ACCF and showed a negative correlation with HU values. By adding the measurement of non-operated vertebral heights as a control standard, the results of cage subsidence measured by the ratio method are likely to be more robust, perhaps can exclude unavoidable errors caused by different equipment and proportional.