UNASSIGNED: The aim of this study is to investigate the clinical outcomes of transforaminal lumbar endoscopic discectomy (TLED) in patients with L5-S1 lumbar disc herniation (LDH).
UNASSIGNED: Seventy-five consecutive individuals with diagnosed foraminal/extraforaminal L5-S1 LDH were included in this study. All patients underwent TLED, being subsequently evaluated in a 2-year follow-up period. Assessment was performed preoperatively and at 6 weeks and 3, 6, 12 and 24 months postoperatively. Visual Analogue Scale (distinctly applied for lower limb - VAS-LP and low back - VAS-BP pain) and Short-Form 36 (SF-36) Medical Health Survey Questionnaire were implemented to assess pain and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of enrolled individuals, respectively.
UNASSIGNED: No major perioperative complications were observed. Recorded values of all studied indices were demonstrated to feature a clinically and statistically significant amelioration at 6 weeks, presenting lesser improvement at 3 months with subsequent stabilisation. VAS-LP and VAS-BP values were displayed to reach a plateau in 6 months postoperatively, whereas all parameters of SF-36 continued to present a statistically significant improvement until the end of follow-up at 2 years.
UNASSIGNED: TLED represent a safe and efficient technique in terms of diminishing perceived pain and improving HRQoL in patients with L5-S1 LDHs. However, specific patient- and technique-related circumstances on the ground of low surgical experience may limit its effectiveness in these patients.

UNASSIGNED: S1-L5 transdiscal screw fixation is a direct stabilization technique used for surgical treatment of high-grade (III-IV) L5-S1 spondylolisthesis. It has not been used for nonspondylolisthetic cases or in combination with an interbody cage (IC). This study aimed to develop a novel, direct S1-L5 sacrolumbar interbody fusion (SLIF) technique, a combination of IC and sacrolumbar transdiscal screw.
UNASSIGNED: SLIF was tested in cadaveric, clinical, and finite element analysis settings. Three cadaveric lumbar spines were used to test the SLIF procedure before clinical application. Eight patients underwent the SLIF procedure. Clinical outcomes were evaluated by visual analog score for leg and back pain, short form 36, Oswestry disability index, and neurological examination. CT scans of the lumbar spine were used to assess the hardware placement and subsequent fusion. Finite element analysis was performed on a healthy human CT-based L5-S1 model. Intact segment, unilateral facetectomy and discectomy, SLIF, and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) procedures were compared in terms of the range of motion (ROM), von Mises stress on hardware, and shear-induced directional deformity. Additionally, the same set of tests were conducted in an osteoporotic model.
UNASSIGNED: Excellent hardware placement was feasible in three cadavers and eight patients. Preoperative neurological deficits improved in all patients. Statistically significant improvements were obtained on all self-reported questionnaire scores. All patients developed solid, Bridwell grade I fusions. Biomechanical testing revealed similar outcomes for TLIF and SLIF regarding the ROM. However, the screw\'s von Mises stress and shear-induced directional deformity were low for SLIF of healthy and osteoporotic bone.
UNASSIGNED: SLIF is a feasible, safe, and effective L5-S1 fusion option suitable for all clinical scenarios. It provides several biomechanical advantages, yielding excellent clinical outcomes.

METHODS: Narrative review.
OBJECTIVE: Metastatic spine disease is an increasingly common clinical challenge that requires individualised multidisciplinary care from spine surgeons and oncologists. In this article, the authors describe the recent surgical advances in patients presenting with spinal metastases.
METHODS: We present an overview of the presentation, assessment, and management of spinal metastases from the perspective of the spine surgeon, highlighting advances in surgical technology and techniques, to facilitate multidisciplinary care for this complex patient group. Neither institutional review board approval nor patient consent was needed for this review.
RESULTS: Advances in radiotherapy delivery and systemic therapy (including immunotherapy and targeted therapy) have refined operative indications for decompression of neural structures and spinal stabilisation, while advances in surgical technology and technique enable these goals to be achieved with reduced morbidity. Formulating individualised management strategies that optimise outcome, while meeting patient goals and expectations, requires a comprehensive understanding of the factors important to patient management.
CONCLUSIONS: Spinal metastases require prompt diagnosis and expert management by a multidisciplinary team. Improvements in systemic, radiation, and surgical therapies have broadened operative indications and increased operative candidacy, and future advances are likely to continue this trend.

Minimally invasive spinal surgery has shown benefits not only from a clinical standpoint but also in some cost-effectiveness metrics. Microendoscopic procedures combine optical advantages of endoscopy with the preservation of bimanual surgical maneuvers that are not feasible with full percutaneous endoscopic procedures. TELIGEN is a new endoscopic platform designed to optimize these operations. Our aim was to present a retrospective review of surgical data from the first consecutive cases applying this device in our institution and describe some of its technical details. 25 patients have underwent procedures using this device at our institution to the date, with a mean follow-up of 341.7 ± 45.1 days. 17 decompression-only procedures, including microendoscopic discectomies (MED) and decompression of stenosis (MEDS), with or without foraminotomies (± MEF) and 8 microendoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusions (ME-TLIF) were performed. Mean age and body mass index (BMI) were respectively 58.8 ± 17.4 years and 27.6 ± 5.3 kg/m2. Estimated blood loss (13 ± 4.8, 12.8 ± 6.98 and 76.3 ± 35.02 mL), postoperative length of hospital stay (11.2 ± 21.74, 22.1 ± 26.85 and 80.7 ± 44.60 h), operative time (130.3 ± 58.53, 121 ± 33.90 and 241.5 ± 45.27 min) and cumulative intraprocedural radiation dose (14.2 ± 6.36, 15.4 ± 12.17 and 72.8 ± 12.26 mGy) are reported in this paper for MED ± MEF, MEDS ± MEF and ME-TLIF, respectively. TELIGEN affords an expanded surgical field of view with unique engineered benefits that provide a promissing platform to enhance minimally invasive spine surgery.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the clinical effectiveness and safety of percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar discectomy (PEID) in the management of high-grade migrated Lumbar disc herniation (LDH).
METHODS: A total of 328 patients who underwent PEID for high-grade migrated LDH between May 2020 and January 2023 in our hospital were selected. Patients were categorized into high-grade migrated group and low-grade migrated group according to preoperative MRI findings. The preoperative and postoperative evaluations of clinical outcomes, such as Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for lower backs and legs, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and modified MacNab criteria for surgical success, were compared between groups.
RESULTS: No statistically significant differences were found in hospitalization time, surgery time, intraoperative hemorrhage, number of intraoperative fluoroscopies, or incision length between the two groups. The lower back and leg VAS scores and ODI exhibited a statistically significant decrease in both groups across all postoperative time intervals. However, the difference between the two groups was not statistically significant. Postoperative nerve root stimulation symptoms were reported in two and three cases in the high-grade migrated group and low-grade migrated group, respectively. One patient in the high-grade migrated group underwent reoperation due to re-herniation at the same segment. There was no significant difference in the rate of excellent-good cases between the two groups, with an overall rate of 94.7%.
CONCLUSIONS: In treating high-grade migrated disc herniation, PEID offers advantages such as reduced trauma, small incision, quicker recovery and satisfactory clinical safety and efficacy.

Remarkable innovations in spinal endoscopic surgery have broadened its applications over the past 20 years. Full-endoscopic fusions have been widely reported, and several full-endoscopic approaches for interbody fusion have been published. In general, full-endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (LIF) is called Endo-LIF, and facet-preserving Endo-LIF through the transforaminal route is called trans-Kambin\'s triangle LIF, which has a relatively longer history than facet-sacrificing Endo-LIF via the posterolateral route. Both approaches can reduce intraoperative and postoperative bleeding. However, there is a higher risk of subsidence and exit nerve root injury. There is no direct decompression in either of the interbody fusions, and additional decompression is required if there is severe lumbar bony canal stenosis. However, the posterior interlaminar approach, which is a well-known standard in full-endoscopic spine surgery, has rarely been applied in the field of endoscopic lumbar fusion surgery. Full-endoscopic posterior LIF (FE-PLIF) via an interlaminar approach can accomplish direct decompression of bony canal stenosis and safe interbody fusion. FE-PLIF via an interlaminar approach demonstrated a longer operation time, less blood loss, and shorter hospitalization duration than minimally invasive transforaminal LIF. FE-PLIF, which can accomplish direct decompression for bony spinal canal stenosis, is superior to other Endo-LIFs. However, FE-PLIF requires technical dexterity to improve efficiency and reduce technical complexity.

Background: Managing vertebral metastases (VM) is still challenging in oncology, necessitating the use of effective surgical strategies to preserve patient quality of life (QoL). Traditional open posterior fusion (OPF) and percutaneous osteosynthesis (PO) are well-documented approaches, but their comparative efficacy remains debated. Methods: This retrospective study compared short-term outcomes (6-12 months) between OPF and PO in 78 cancer patients with spinal metastases. This comprehensive evaluation included functional, clinical, and radiographic parameters. Statistical analysis utilized PRISM software (version 10), with significance set at p < 0.05. Results: PO demonstrated advantages over OPF, including shorter surgical durations, reduced blood loss, and hospital stay, along with lower perioperative complication rates. Patient quality of life and functional outcomes favored PO, particularly at the 6-month mark. The mortality rates at one year were significantly lower in the PO group. Conclusions: Minimally invasive techniques offer promising benefits in VM management, optimizing patient outcomes and QoL. Despite limitations, this study advocates for the adoption of minimally invasive approaches to enhance the care of multi-metastatic patients with symptomatic VM.

Minimally invasive surgical approaches to the spine that leverage indirect decompression are gaining increasing popularity. While there is excellent literature on the value of indirect decompression, there are limitations to this procedure. Specifically, in patients with severe stenosis and neurogenic claudication, there is a concern among many surgeons regarding the adequacy of indirect decompression alone. In these cases, the lateral approach is often abandoned in favor of an open posterior or posterior minimally invasive approach. Unfortunately, some of the distinct benefits of the direct lateral approach are then lost. Here, we present the case of a 58-year-old male who underwent an L4-L5 lateral interbody fusion with an endoscopic ipsi-contra decompression to achieve both direct and indirect treatment of severe neuroforaminal and central stenosis. From this strategy, this patient had complete pre-operative symptom resolution and was able to return to work immediately after surgery without significant restriction. Combining the benefits of direct and indirect using an ultra-minimally invasive decompressive approach offers a potential solution.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive posterior fixation surgery for pyogenic spondylitis is known to reduce invasiveness and complication rates; however, the outcomes of concomitant insertion of pedicle screws (PS) into the infected vertebrae via the posterior approach are undetermined. This study aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of PS insertion into infected vertebrae in minimally invasive posterior fixation for thoracolumbar pyogenic spondylitis.
METHODS: This multicenter retrospective cohort study included 70 patients undergoing minimally invasive posterior fixation for thoracolumbar pyogenic spondylitis across nine institutions. Patients were categorized into insertion and skip groups based on PS insertion into infected vertebrae, and surgical data and postoperative outcomes, particularly unplanned reoperations due to complications, were compared.
RESULTS: The mean age of the 70 patients was 72.8 years. The insertion group (n = 36) had shorter operative times (146 versus 195 min, p = 0.032) and a reduced range of fixation (5.4 versus 6.9 vertebrae, p = 0.0009) compared to the skip group (n = 34). Unplanned reoperations occurred in 24% (n = 17) due to surgical site infections (SSI) or implant failure; the incidence was comparable between the groups. Poor infection control necessitating additional anterior surgery was reported in four patients in the skip group.
CONCLUSIONS: PS insertion into infected vertebrae during minimally invasive posterior fixation reduces the operative time and range of fixation without increasing the occurrence of unplanned reoperations due to SSI or implant failure. Judicious PS insertion in patients with minimal bone destruction in thoracolumbar pyogenic spondylitis can minimize surgical invasiveness.

BACKGROUND: Robotic spine surgery, utilizing 3D imaging and robotic arms, has been shown to improve the accuracy of pedicle screw placement compared to conventional methods, although its superiority remains under debate. There are few studies evaluating the accuracy of 3D navigated versus robotic-guided screw placement across lumbar levels, addressing anatomical challenges to refine surgical strategies and patient safety.
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to investigate the pedicle screw placement accuracy between 3D navigation and robotic arm-guided systems across distinct lumbar levels.
METHODS: A retrospective review of a prospectively collected registry PATIENT SAMPLE: Patients undergoing fusion surgery with pedicle screw placement in the prone position, using either via 3D image navigation only or robotic arm guidance OUTCOME MEASURE: Radiographical screw accuracy was assessed by the postoperative computed tomography (CT) according to the Gertzbein-Robbins classification, particularly focused on accuracy at different lumbar levels.
METHODS: Accuracy of screw placement in the 3D navigation (Nav group) and robotic arm guidance (Robo group) was compared using Chi-squared test/Fisher\'s exact test with effect size measured by Cramer\'s V, both overall and at each specific lumbosacral spinal level.
RESULTS: A total of 321 patients were included (Nav, 157; Robo, 189) and evaluated 1210 screws (Nav, 651; Robo 559). The Robo group demonstrated significantly higher overall accuracy (98.6 vs. 93.9%; p<.001, V=0.25). This difference of no breach screw rate was signified the most at the L3 level (No breach screw: Robo 91.3 vs. 57.8%, p<.001, V=0.35) followed by L4 (89.6 vs. 64.7%, p<.001, V=0.28), and L5 (92.0 vs. 74.5%, p<.001, V=0.22). However, screw accuracy at S1 was not significant between the groups (81.1 vs. 72.0%, V=0.10).
CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the enhanced accuracy of robotic arm-guided systems compared to 3D navigation for pedicle screw placement in lumbar fusion surgeries, especially at the L3, L4, and L5 levels. However, at the S1 level, both systems exhibit similar effectiveness, underscoring the importance of understanding each system\'s specific advantages for optimization of surgical complications.