Luca Ambrosio, Jordy Schol, Stone Sima, Clara Ruiz-Fernandez, Victor Chen, Fabrizio Russo, In-Ho Han, Daisuke Sakai, Gianluca Vadalà, Vincenzo Denaro, Ashish D. Diwan, AO Spine Knowledge Forum Degenerative
Neurospine 2026;23(1):3-28. Published online January 31, 2026
Lumbar disc herniation (LDH) is one of the most common causes of low back and leg pain. While mechanical and degenerative factors have long been considered the main contributors, persistent or recurrent symptoms in many patients suggest additional biological mechanisms. Recent research has highlighted the microbiome as a potential modulator of inflammation, immune response, and pain sensitization, introducing the “gut-spine axis” concept. This scoping review summarizes the current evidence on the role of both gut and local disc microbiota in LDH. A systematic search of PubMed/MEDLINE and Scopus was conducted up to June 2025, following PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines. Twenty-six studies were included, encompassing preclinical and clinical investigations. Animal models showed that LDH may alter gut microbial composition and that microbiome-targeted interventions can reduce inflammation, neuroinflammatory signaling, and pain sensitivity. In human studies, low-virulence bacteria, particularly Cutibacterium acnes, were frequently detected in surgically excised intervertebral discs, although results were inconsistent due to methodological heterogeneity and potential contamination. Some studies reported associations between bacterial colonization and Modic changes, disc height loss, or chronic pain. Additionally, genetic and metabolomic data suggest that gut dysbiosis and related microbial metabolites may influence systemic immune and metabolic pathways implicated in disc degeneration and pain perception. Overall, the current evidence suggests the biological plausibility of microbiome involvement in LDH pathophysiology, acting through both systemic and local mechanisms. However, the available data remain preliminary, and no mechanistic study has confirmed the observed correlations to date. Further standardized, contamination-aware studies are required to clarify causality and explore microbiome-targeted therapeutic strategies.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain Without Advanced Disk Degeneration Exhibit Gut Microbiome Dysbiosis: Evidence From an Age‐, Sex‐, and BMI‐Matched Pilot Study Stone Sima, Thomas Jeffries, Alisha Sial, Suhani Sharma, Neha Chopra, Fan Zhang, Georgina Hold, Wentian Li, Ji Tu, Victor Chen, Ashish Diwan JOR SPINE.2026;[Epub] CrossRef
Conservative Treatment of Lumbosacral Intervertebral Disc Herniations: A Review of Current Approaches Kirill M. Kasatkin Medicine and Biotechnology.2026; 2(2): 124. CrossRef
Lost in Translation: Why Biologic Therapies for Intervertebral Disc Degeneration and Low Back Pain Have Not Reached the Clinic (Yet) Luca Ambrosio, Jordy Schol, Clara Ruiz‐Fernandez, Vincenzo Denaro, Gianluca Vadalà, Daisuke Sakai JOR SPINE.2026;[Epub] CrossRef
This study aimed to elucidate the efficacy and safety of mesenchymal stromal cell (MSC) therapy for chronic discogenic low back pain (LBP). A systematic literature search was conducted on PubMed/Medline, Scopus, Cochrane, and ClinicalTrials.gov following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis) guidelines. Eligible studies included published and ongoing clinical trials assessing intradiscal MSC injections in patients with chronic discogenic LBP unresponsive to conservative treatment. Risk-of-bias (RoB) assessment was performed through MINORS (Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies) and RoB 2 tools. Within- and between-group differences were expressed as means and 95% confidence intervals. Effect sizes were calculated through Cohen d and g. Data from 10 published clinical studies (n=736; 470 in treatment and 266 in control groups) revealed a mean age of 41.5 years and an average follow-up of 21.6 (range, 6–72) months. Various MSC sources were employed, including autologous and allogeneic bone marrow-derived MSCs and adipose-derived MSCs, with doses ranging from 6×10⁶ to over 50×10⁶ cells/disc. Visual analogue scale, Oswestry Disability Index, and quality-of-life questionnaires indicated modest improvements in pain, disability, and functional status. Additionally, magnetic resonance imaging assessments occasionally demonstrated increased disc hydration and stabilization or improvement of Pfirrmann grade. Data from 8 ongoing trials (n=498 participants; 276 treatment, 222 control) with follow-up periods ranging 6–24 months further corroborate the feasibility and safety of MSC-based interventions. MSC therapy is a biologically-driven approach for managing chronic discogenic LBP. While preliminary data support its potential to alleviate pain and improve disc integrity, further high-quality, standardized trials are necessary to optimize treatment protocols and confirm long-term clinical benefits.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Pathophysiology, diagnosis, and management of discogenic low back pain: a phenotype-driven precision framework for surgical and interventional decision-making Yanxu Feng, Yahao Li, Zhongqiu Sa, Zhilin Bai, Feng Mao, Jiangfeng Yu Frontiers in Surgery.2026;[Epub] CrossRef
Pre‐Conditioned Bone Marrow Mesenchymal Stromal Cell‐Derived Secretome Exerts an Anti‐Inflammatory Effect on Degenerative Nucleus Pulposus Cells In Vitro Veronica Tilotta, Gianluca Vadalà, Luca Ambrosio, Giuseppina Di Giacomo, Claudia Cicione, Fabrizio Russo, Rocco Papalia, Vincenzo Denaro JOR SPINE.2026;[Epub] CrossRef
Lost in Translation: Why Biologic Therapies for Intervertebral Disc Degeneration and Low Back Pain Have Not Reached the Clinic (Yet) Luca Ambrosio, Jordy Schol, Clara Ruiz‐Fernandez, Vincenzo Denaro, Gianluca Vadalà, Daisuke Sakai JOR SPINE.2026;[Epub] CrossRef
Efficacy and safety of different surgical approaches in the treatment of multilevel cervical ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament: a network meta-analysis Xuezhi Liu, Yan Wang, Yanxin Li, Lulu Zhang, Xiaotian Feng, Qiyu Wang, Peichuan Yang, Benchao Dong, Jianxiong Ma BMC Surgery.2026;[Epub] CrossRef
Preoperative radiotherapy combined with surgery versus surgery alone for primary retroperitoneal sarcoma: a meta-analysis Young Rak Kim, Chang-Hyun Lee, Hangeul Park, Jun-Hoe Kim, Chi Heon Kim Scientific Reports.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Luca Ambrosio, Gianluca Vadalà, Javad Tavakoli, Laura Scaramuzzo, Giovanni Barbanti Brodano, Stephen J. Lewis, So Kato, Samuel K. Cho, S. Tim Yoon, Ho-Joong Kim, Matthew F. Gary, Vincenzo Denaro, AO Spine Knowledge Forum Degenerative
Neurospine 2024;21(1):204-211. Published online March 31, 2024
Objective To evaluate the global practice pattern of wound dressing use after lumbar fusion for degenerative conditions.
Methods A survey issued by AO Spine Knowledge Forums Deformity and Degenerative was sent out to AO Spine members. The type of postoperative dressing employed, timing of initial dressing removal, and type of subsequent dressing applied were investigated. Differences in the type of surgery and regional distribution of surgeons’ preferences were analyzed.
Results Right following surgery, 60.6% utilized a dry dressing, 23.2% a plastic occlusive dressing, 5.7% glue, 6% a combination of glue and polyester mesh, 2.6% a wound vacuum, and 1.2% other dressings. The initial dressing was removed on postoperative day 1 (11.6%), 2 (39.2%), 3 (20.3%), 4 (1.7%), 5 (4.3%), 6 (0.4%), 7 or later (12.5%), or depending on drain removal (9.9%). Following initial dressing removal, 75.9% applied a dry dressing, 17.7% a plastic occlusive dressing, and 1.3% glue, while 12.1% used no dressing. The use of no additional coverage after initial dressing removal was significantly associated with a later dressing change (p < 0.001). Significant differences emerged after comparing dressing management among different AO Spine regions (p < 0.001).
Conclusion Most spine surgeons utilized a dry or plastic occlusive dressing initially applied after surgery. The first dressing was more frequently changed during the first 3 postoperative days and replaced with the same type of dressing. While dressing policies tended not to vary according to the type of surgery, regional differences suggest that actual practice may be based on personal experience rather than available evidence.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Duration of Wound Coverage for the Prevention of Surgical Site Infections After Surgery: A Systematic Review of Current Evidence With Meta‐Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials Moira D. Cruickshank, Kirsty Loudon, Paul D. Manson, George Ramsay, Miriam G. Brazzelli International Wound Journal.2026;[Epub] CrossRef
The AO Spine Knowledge Forums: A Decade of Impactful Spine Research Klaus John Schnake, Michael G. Fehlings, Niccole Germscheid, Shekar Kurpad, Ilya Laufer, Stephen J. Lewis, Gregory D. Schroeder, S. Tim Yoon, Charles G. Fisher Global Spine Journal.2025; 15(7): 3039. CrossRef
Two-week post-operative dressing: balancing cost and surgical site infection risk in orthopaedic procedures Musa Muhammad, Aliyu M. Maigoro, Lamidi Jimoh, Rabiu A. Rufai, Oni N. Salawu, Shamsuddeen Muhammad, Sani A. Giade, Kabir B. Jatto, Shem B. Yilleng International Journal of Research in Orthopaedics.2025; 12(1): 30. CrossRef
Objective Several studies have advocated for the higher accuracy of transpedicular screw placement under cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) compared to conventional 2-dimensional (2D) fluoroscopy. The superiority of navigation systems in perioperative and postoperative outcomes remains a topic of debate. This study aimed to compare operative time, screw placement time and accuracy, total radiation dose, perioperative and postoperative outcomes in patients who underwent transpedicular screw fixation for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS) using intraoperative CBCT navigation versus 2D fluoroscopy.
Methods A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients affected by single-level DLS who underwent posterior lumbar instrumentation with transpedicular screw fixation using surgical CBCT navigation (NV group) or 2D fluoroscopy-assisted freehand technique (FH group). Demographics, screw placement time and accuracy, operative time, total radiation dose, intraoperative blood loss, screw revision rate, complications, and length of stay (LOS) were assessed.
Results The study included a total of 30 patients (NV group: n = 15; FH group: n = 15). The mean screw placement time, operative time, and LOS were significantly reduced in the NV group compared to the FH group (p < 0.05). The total radiation dose was significantly higher in the NV group (p < 0.0001). No significant difference was found in terms of blood loss and postoperative complications.
Conclusion This study suggests that intraoperative CBCT-navigated single-level lumbar transpedicular screw fixation is superior in terms of mean screw placement time, operative time, and LOS compared to 2D fluoroscopy, despite a higher intraoperative radiation exposure.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Evidence-Based Guidelines for the Surgical Management of Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis Harrison J. Howell, Nathan J. Winans, Dean Chou, Andrew K. Chan Neurosurgery Clinics of North America.2026; 37(1): 1. CrossRef
Comparative analysis of the pedicle screw accuracy, screw revision and loosening rate and radiation exposure of robotic-guided (RG), intraoperative computed tomography (iCT)-navigation guided, and fluoroscopy guided placement technique Mirza Pojskić, Miriam Bopp, Omar Alwakaa, Christopher Nimsky, Benjamin Saß Brain and Spine.2026; 6: 105899. CrossRef
Complications With Navigation-Assistance in Thoraco-Lumbar Spine Surgery Takeshi Fujii, Patricia Lipson, Kenneth T. Nguyen, Gianluca Vadalà, Laura Scaramuzzo, Patrick Hsieh, Katie Krause, Sangwook Tim Yoon, Philip K. Louie Global Spine Journal.2026;[Epub] CrossRef
Framework for Adoption of Enabling Technologies for Improved Outcomes in Spine Surgery Sathish Muthu, Swaminathan Ramasubramanian, Madhan Jeyaraman, Roger Hartl, Javad Tavakoli, Samuel K. Cho, Laura Scaramuzzo, Hardeep Singh, Philip K. Louie, Andreas K. Demetriades, Patrick C. Hsieh, Stipe Ćorluka, Yabin Wu, Xiaolong Chen, Hai V. Le, Gianlu Global Spine Journal.2025; 15(6): 2977. CrossRef
Open Versus Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery in the Treatment of Single-Level Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis: An AO Spine Global Cross-Sectional Study Luca Ambrosio, Sathish Muthu, Samuel K. Cho, Micheal S. Virk, Juan P. Cabrera, Patrick C. Hsieh, Andreas K. Demetriades, Stipe Ćorluka, S. Tim Yoon, Gianluca Vadalà Neurospine.2025; 22(1): 40. CrossRef
Deviation from preoperative planning and pedicle screw accuracy in navigated and robotic spinal fusion: a systematic review Fabrizio Russo, Niccolò Nardi, Giuseppe Francesco Papalia, Rocco Papalia, Gianluca Vadalà, Vincenzo Denaro European Spine Journal.2025; 34(5): 1890. CrossRef
Objective To assess the effect of transitioning to remote working during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic in a population of adults affected by chronic low back pain (cLBP).
Methods An online questionnaire was sent by email to teleworkers affected by cLBP. Demographic data, remote working features and tasks, and LBP burden were analyzed. The psychological burden of remote working was evaluated with the World Health Organization Five Well-Being Index and the Patient Health Questionnaire-2. LBP severity was evaluated using a visual analogue scale. LBP-related disability was assessed using the Oswestry Disability Index. The effect of LBP on working capacity was examined with the Occupational Role Questionnaire. Independent risk factors related to LBP worsening were identified using a multivariate logistic regression model.
Results During remote working, LBP severity was significantly higher compared to previous in-person working (p < 0.0001), as well as average weekly work hours (p < 0.001). Furthermore, the risk of LBP worsening was associated with higher depression scores (odds ratio [OR], 1.38; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00–1.91; p = 0.048), increased stress levels (OR: 3.00, 95% CI: 1.04–8.65; p = 0.042), and being divorced (OR: 4.28, 95% CI: 1.27–14.47; p = 0.019). Conversely, living with others (OR: 0.24, 95% CI: 0.07–0.81; p = 0.021), and reporting unchanged stress levels (OR: 0.22, 95% CI: 0.08–0.65; p = 0.006) were associated with a lower risk of LBP worsening.
Conclusion Our findings highlight key factors to consider for improving remote workers’ physical and mental wellbeing and decrease their LBP burden.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Enhanced disc regeneration through CRISPR/Cas9-mediated SOX9 and TGFβ1 coexpression in tonsil-derived mesenchymal stromal cells Somin Lee, Yerin Yu, Dong hee Kim, Minsung Bock, Yeji Kim, Seong Bae An, Hyemin Choi, Hae Eun Shin, Dong-Youn Hwang, Inbo Han Stem Cell Research & Therapy.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Screening patients requiring secondary lumbar surgery for degenerative lumbar spine diseases: a nationwide sample cohort study Hangeul Park, Juhee Lee, Yunhee Choi, Jun-Hoe Kim, Sum Kim, Young-Rak Kim, Chang-Hyun Lee, Sung Bae Park, Kyoung-Tae Kim, John M. Rhee, Chi Heon Kim Scientific Reports.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Instrumented spine procedures have been performed for decades to treat a wide variety of spinal disorders. New technologies have been employed to obtain a high degree of precision, to minimize risks of damage to neurovascular structures and to diminish harmful exposure of patients and the operative team to ionizing radiations. Robotic spine surgery comprehends 3 major categories: telesurgical robotic systems, robotic-assisted navigation (RAN) and virtual augmented reality (AR) systems, including AR and virtual reality. Telesurgical systems encompass devices that can be operated from a remote command station, allowing to perform surgery via instruments being manipulated by the robot. On the other hand, RAN technologies are characterized by the robotic guidance of surgeon-operated instruments based on real-time imaging. Virtual AR systems are able to show images directly on special visors and screens allowing the surgeon to visualize information about the patient and the procedure (i.e., anatomical landmarks, screw direction and inclination, distance from neurological and vascular structures etc.). The aim of this review is to focus on the current state of the art of robotics and AR in spine surgery and perspectives of these emerging technologies that hold promises for future applications.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Evaluation of pedicle screw accuracy and deviation from preoperative planning in intraoperative Cone-Beam Computed Tomography-Navigated lumbar spinal fusion: a prospective study Gianluca Vadalà, Giuseppe Francesco Papalia, Niccolò Nardi, Fabrizio Russo, Luca Ambrosio, Girolamo Maltese, Rocco Papalia, Vincenzo Denaro Brain and Spine.2026; 6: 105988. CrossRef
Enhancing precision in robotic navigated minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion using a streamlined surgical workflow: a technical note Gianluca Vadalà, Fabrizio Russo, Giuseppe Francesco Papalia, Luca Ambrosio, Domenico Franco, Girolamo Maltese, Niccolò Nardi, Rocco Papalia, Vincenzo Denaro Brain and Spine.2026; 6: 106003. CrossRef
Remote Robotic Surgery, Telesurgery, 5G Network Safety, Latency, and Haptic Feedback: Scoping Review with ☸️SAIMSARA
Robotic Assistance in Posterolateral Lumbar Fusion Is Associated with Higher Comorbidity Burden, Greater 90-Day Infectious Complications, and Increased Episode Costs Mitchell K. Ng, Paul G. Mastrokostas, Anton J. Cristofoli, Leonidas E. Mastrokostas, Vinay Bijoor, Alejandro J. Friedman, Pemla Jagtiani, Michael S. Schallmo, Jonathan Dalton, Matthew Meade, Anthony E. Seddio, Arya Varthi, Jad Bou Monsef, Afshin E. Razi, The Spine Journal.2026;[Epub] CrossRef
Application of extended reality in pediatric neurosurgery: A comprehensive review Yau-Zen Chang, Chieh-Tsai Wu Biomedical Journal.2025; 48(4): 100822. CrossRef
Comparative analysis of modified posterior mini-open surgery versus standard open posterior approach for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis correction: a prospective study Leonardo Oggiano, Sergio De Salvatore, Davide Palombi, Paolo Brigato, Umile Giuseppe Longo, Pier Francesco Costici European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Deviation from preoperative planning and pedicle screw accuracy in navigated and robotic spinal fusion: a systematic review Fabrizio Russo, Niccolò Nardi, Giuseppe Francesco Papalia, Rocco Papalia, Gianluca Vadalà, Vincenzo Denaro European Spine Journal.2025; 34(5): 1890. CrossRef
Pedicle Screw Placement With Augmented Reality Versus Robotic-Assisted Surgery Franziska C.S. Altorfer, Michael J. Kelly, Fedan Avrumova, Marco D. Burkhard, Jiaqi Zhu, Frederik Abel, Frank P. Cammisa, Andrew Sama, Mazda Farshad, Darren R. Lebl Spine.2025; 50(15): 1058. CrossRef
Advances in Metastatic Disease Spinal Oncology: Novel Technology Without Forgetting the Fundamentals of Surgical Treatment Harsh Jain, Ranbir Ahluwalia, Ilya Laufer, Scott L. Zuckerman Neurospine.2025; 22(3): 829. CrossRef
From Data to Decision: A Comprehensive Review of Real-Time Analytics and Smart Technologies in the Surgical Suite Jacob B. Watson, Carlos Quintero-Peña, Anna C. Moise, Alan B. Lumsden, Stuart J. Corr Methodist DeBakey Cardiovascular Journal.2025; 21(5): 5. CrossRef
Accuracy and potential risk factors of pedicle screw placement using a noninvasive-registration robotic system in the thoracolumbar spine Rui Yang, Kui Wang, Weilin Li, Jiajun Feng, Jian Jiang, Yuefeng Sun, Hong Wang Journal of Robotic Surgery.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Orthopedic robotic surgery: multiple analytical approaches and a bibliometric study of the top 100 most cited papers Siddig Ibrahim Abdelwahab, Manal Mohamed Elhassan Taha, Abdullah Farasani, Jobran M. Moshi, Abrar Fahad Alshahrani, Ahmad Assiri, Saeed Alshahrani, Muhammad H. Sultan, Khaled A. Sahli, Hussam M. Shubaily, Waseem Hassan Journal of Robotic Surgery.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Update zur Navigation im OP-Saal Philipp Anthony Wise, Alexander Studier-Fischer, Thilo Hackert, Felix Nickel Zentralblatt für Chirurgie - Zeitschrift für Allgemeine, Viszeral-, Thorax- und Gefäßchirurgie.2024; 149(06): 522. CrossRef
Comparing a virtual reality head-mounted display to on-screen three-dimensional visualization and two-dimensional computed tomography data for training in decision making in hepatic surgery: a randomized controlled study Anas Amin Preukschas, Philipp Anthony Wise, Lisa Bettscheider, Micha Pfeiffer, Martin Wagner, Matthias Huber, Mohammad Golriz, Lars Fischer, Arianeb Mehrabi, Fabian Rössler, Stefanie Speidel, Thilo Hackert, Beat Peter Müller-Stich, Felix Nickel, Hannes Gö Surgical Endoscopy.2024; 38(5): 2483. CrossRef
User Experience Evaluation of a Spinal Surgery Robot: Workload, Usability, and Satisfaction Study Hyeonkyeong Choi, Seunghee Kim, Wonseuk Jang JMIR Human Factors.2024; 11: e54425. CrossRef
Preserving privacy in big data research: the role of federated learning in spine surgery Hania Shahzad, Cole Veliky, Hai Le, Sheeraz Qureshi, Frank M. Phillips, Yashar Javidan, Safdar N. Khan European Spine Journal.2024; 33(11): 4076. CrossRef
Navigation-Guided/Robot-Assisted Spinal Surgery: A Review Article Young-Seok Lee, Dae-Chul Cho, Kyoung-Tae Kim Neurospine.2024; 21(1): 8. CrossRef
Safety and Complications Related to Emerging Technologies Gianluca Vadalà, Luca Ambrosio, Vincenzo Denaro Neurospine.2024; 21(1): 6. CrossRef
Intraoperative Cone-Beam Computed Tomography Navigation Versus 2-Dimensional Fluoroscopy in Single-Level Lumbar Spinal Fusion: A Comparative Analysis Gianluca Vadalà, Giuseppe Francesco Papalia, Fabrizio Russo, Paolo Brigato, Luca Ambrosio, Rocco Papalia, Vincenzo Denaro Neurospine.2024; 21(1): 76. CrossRef
Higher Accuracy and Better Clinical Outcomes in Navigated Thoraco-Lumbar Pedicle Screw Fixation Versus Conventional Techniques Giuseppe F. Papalia, Gianluca Vadalà, Fabrizio Russo, Gianmarco Marcello, Niccolò Nardi, Rocco Papalia, Vincenzo Denaro Spine.2024; 49(19): 1370. CrossRef
Computed tomography and structured light imaging guided orthopedic navigation puncture system: effective reduction of intraoperative image drift and mismatch Zaopeng He, Guanghua Xu, Guodong Zhang, Zeyu Wang, Jingsong Sun, Wei Li, Dongbo Liu, Yibin Tian, Wenhua Huang, Daozhang Cai Frontiers in Surgery.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
MINARO DRS: usability study of a robotic-assisted laminectomy Manuel Vossel, Lukas Theisgen, Noah Wickel, Lovis Phlippen, Rastislav Pjontek, Sergey Drobinsky, Hans Clusmann, Klaus Radermacher, Christian Blume, Matías de la Fuente International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery.2024; 20(2): 357. CrossRef
Design and Evaluation of Augmented Reality-Enhanced Robotic System for Epidural Interventions Amir Sayadi, Renzo Cecere, Jake Barralet, Liane S. Feldman, Amir Hooshiar Sensors.2024; 24(24): 7959. CrossRef
Augmented reality for minimally invasive spinal surgery Fedan Avrumova, Darren R. Lebl Frontiers in Surgery.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Enabling Precision Medicine via Contemporary and Future Communication Technologies: A Survey Uche K. Chude-Okonkwo, Babu S. Paul, Athanasios V. Vasilakos IEEE Access.2023; 11: 21210. CrossRef
Interpretation and Use of Applied/Operational Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence in Surgery Molly J. Douglas, Rachel Callcut, Leo Anthony Celi, Nirav Merchant Surgical Clinics of North America.2023; 103(2): 317. CrossRef
Commentary on “Robotics in Cervical Spine Surgery: Feasibility and Safety of Posterior Screw Placement” Gianluca Vadalà, Luca Ambrosio, Vincenzo Denaro Neurospine.2023; 20(1): 340. CrossRef
Editorial: New perspectives and innovative techniques in contemporary spine surgery Luca Ambrosio, Gianluca Vadalà, Fabrizio Russo, Daisuke Sakai, Vincenzo Denaro Frontiers in Surgery.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
To Be Trustworthy, the Robot Assisted Cervical Spine Surgery Needs More Than Accuracy Beyond Technological Limitations: Commentary on “Robotics in Cervical Spine Surgery: Feasibility and Safety of Posterior Screw Placement” Seong Yi Neurospine.2023; 20(2): 725. CrossRef
Three-Dimensional Quantitative Assessment of Pedicle Screw Accuracy in Clinical Utilization of a New Robotic System in Spine Surgery: A Multicenter Study Byeong-Jin Ha, Jong-Min Lee, Seon-Jin Yoon, Byung-Kwan Kim, Junseok Lee, Suhun Lee, Seungjae Ryu, Yongyeob Cha, Sungteac Hwang, Donggi Woo, Chang Kyu Lee, Dong Ah Shin, Yoon Ha, Sung Uk Kuh, Keung Nyun Kim, Dongwuk Son, Seong Yi Neurospine.2023; 20(3): 1028. CrossRef
Review of Enhanced Handheld Surgical Drills David E. Usevitch, Rachel S. Bronheim, Miguel A. Cartagena-Reyes, Carlos Ortiz-Babilonia, Adam Margalit, Amit Jain, Mehran Armand Critical Reviews in Biomedical Engineering.2023; 51(6): 29. CrossRef
Clinical accuracy and initial experience with augmented reality–assisted pedicle screw placement: the first 205 screws Ann Liu, Yike Jin, Ethan Cottrill, Majid Khan, Erick Westbroek, Jeff Ehresman, Zach Pennington, Sheng-fu L. Lo, Daniel M. Sciubba, Camilo A. Molina, Timothy F. Witham Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine.2022; 36(3): 351. CrossRef
Robotic‐Assisted Lumbar Fusion: An Effective Technique for Pedicle Screw Placement Beth Karasin, Gina Rizzo, Tara Hardinge, Monica Grzelak, Lauren Eskuchen, Johanna Watkinson AORN Journal.2022; 115(3): 251. CrossRef
Spine Surgery Assisted by Augmented Reality: Where Have We Been? Yanting Liu, Min-Gi Lee, Jin-Sung Kim Yonsei Medical Journal.2022; 63(4): 305. CrossRef
Robot-assisted and augmented reality–assisted spinal instrumentation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of screw accuracy and outcomes over the last decade Matthew A. Tovar, Ehsan Dowlati, David Y. Zhao, Ziam Khan, Kory B. D. Pasko, Faheem A. Sandhu, Jean-Marc Voyadzis Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine.2022; 37(2): 299. CrossRef
Applications for Augmented and Virtual Reality in Robot-Assisted Spine Surgery Karen Eliahu, Jason Liounakos, Michael Y. Wang Current Robotics Reports.2022; 3(2): 33. CrossRef
Comparative Analysis of Optoelectronic Accuracy in the Laboratory Setting Versus Clinical Operative Environment: A Systematic Review Bryan W. Cunningham, Daina M. Brooks Global Spine Journal.2022; 12(2_suppl): 59S. CrossRef
Bone-Mounted Robotic System in Minimally Invasive Spinal Surgery for Osteoporosis Patients: Clinical and Radiological Outcomes Yu-Feng Su, Tai-Hsin Tsai, Ann-Shung Lieu, Chih-Lung Lin, Chih-Hui Chang, Cheng-Yu Tsai, Hui-Yuan Su Clinical Interventions in Aging.2022; Volume 17: 589. CrossRef
COVID-19 Pandemic Increases the Impact of Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Metanalysis Giuseppe Francesco Papalia, Giorgia Petrucci, Fabrizio Russo, Luca Ambrosio, Gianluca Vadalà, Sergio Iavicoli, Rocco Papalia, Vincenzo Denaro International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health.2022; 19(8): 4599. CrossRef
Augmented Reality in Surgery: A Scoping Review Eleonora Barcali, Ernesto Iadanza, Leonardo Manetti, Piergiorgio Francia, Cosimo Nardi, Leonardo Bocchi Applied Sciences.2022; 12(14): 6890. CrossRef
Pedicle Screw Placement in Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis: A Comparison between Robotics Coupled with Navigation versus the Freehand Technique Gabriel S. Linden, Semhal Ghessese, Danielle Cook, Daniel J. Hedequist Sensors.2022; 22(14): 5204. CrossRef
Accuracy and Safety of Robot‐Assisted versus Fluoroscopy‐Guided Posterior C1 Lateral Mass and C2 Pedicle Screw Internal Fixation for Atlantoaxial Dislocation: A Preliminary Study Jiheng Zhan, Wenke Xu, Jinhao Lin, Jiyao Luan, Yu Hou, Yufeng Wang, Yongjin Li, Bolai Chen, Dingkun Lin, Shudong Chen, Ernesto Roldan-Valadez BioMed Research International.2022;[Epub] CrossRef
Novel C‐arm‐based planning robotic spinal surgery in a cadaver model using quantitative accuracy assessment methodology Sangman Park, Hyung Cheol Kim, Yeongha Jeong, Dongyun Kim, Seungjae Ryu, Seongpung Lee, Yongyeob Cha, Sungteac Hwang, Donggi Woo, Hongho Kim, Dong Ah Shin, Yoon Ha, Keung Nyun Kim, Do Heum Yoon, Seong Yi The International Journal of Medical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery.2022;[Epub] CrossRef
R2 advances in robotic-assisted spine surgery: comparative analysis of options, future directions, and bibliometric analysis of the literature William Mualem, Chiduziem Onyedimma, Abdul Karim Ghaith, Sulaman Durrani, Ryan Jarrah, Rohin Singh, Cameron Zamanian, Karim Rizwan Nathani, Brett A. Freedman, Mohamad Bydon Neurosurgical Review.2022;[Epub] CrossRef
Augmented and virtual reality usage in awake craniotomy: a systematic review Mohammad Mofatteh, Mohammad Sadegh Mashayekhi, Saman Arfaie, Yimin Chen, Asfand Baig Mirza, Jawad Fares, Soham Bandyopadhyay, Edy Henich, Xuxing Liao, Mark Bernstein Neurosurgical Review.2022;[Epub] CrossRef
Novel C‐arm based planning spine surgery robot proved in a porcine model and quantitative accuracy assessment methodology Hyung Cheol Kim, Hyeongseok Jeon, Seong Bae An, Hongho Kim, Sungteac Hwang, Yongyeob Cha, Seohyun Moon, Dong Ah Shin, Yoon Ha, Keung Nyun Kim, Do Heum Yoon, Seong Yi The International Journal of Medical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery.2021;[Epub] CrossRef
Virtual Reality in Preoperative Planning of Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Surgery Using Google Cardboard Sergio De Salvatore, Gianluca Vadalà, Leonardo Oggiano, Fabrizio Russo, Luca Ambrosio, Pier Francesco Costici Neurospine.2021; 18(1): 199. CrossRef
Robotic-Navigated Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Placement Has Less Facet Joint Violation Than Fluoroscopy-Guided Percutaneous Screws Gennadiy A. Katsevman, Raven D. Spencer, Scott D. Daffner, Sanjay Bhatia, Robert A. Marsh, John C. France, Shari Cui, Patricia Dekeseredy, Cara L. Sedney World Neurosurgery.2021; 151: e731. CrossRef
Surgivisio® and O-arm®O2 cone beam CT mobile systems for guidance of lumbar spine surgery: Comparison of patient radiation dose Julia Rousseau, Serge Dreuil, Céline Bassinet, Sophie Cao, Hélène Elleaume Physica Medica.2021; 85: 192. CrossRef
Robotic-Assisted Versus Conventional Posterior Lumbar Fusion—An Analysis of 90-Day Complications and Readmissions Azeem Tariq Malik, Joseph P. Drain, Jeremy Jones, Jonathan Karnes, James Brewster, Robert Ryu, Varun Singh, Jeffery Kim, Safdar N. Khan, Elizabeth Yu World Neurosurgery.2021; 152: e168. CrossRef
The Clinical Application of Augmented Reality in Orthopaedics: Where Do We Stand? J. Hunter Matthews, John S. Shields Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine.2021; 14(5): 316. CrossRef
First in-human report of the clinical accuracy of thoracolumbar percutaneous pedicle screw placement using augmented reality guidance Alexander T. Yahanda, Emelia Moore, Wilson Z. Ray, Brenton Pennicooke, Jack W. Jennings, Camilo A. Molina Neurosurgical Focus.2021; 51(2): E10. CrossRef
Commentary on “Risk Factors of Unsatisfactory Robot-Assisted Pedicle Screw Placement: A Case-Control Study” Jun Ho Lee Neurospine.2021; 18(4): 845. CrossRef
The role of the orthopaedic surgeon in the COVID‐19 era: cautions and perspectives Luca Ambrosio, Gianluca Vadalà, Fabrizio Russo, Rocco Papalia, Vincenzo Denaro Journal of Experimental Orthopaedics.2020;[Epub] CrossRef
Research on Accuracy of Augmented Reality Surgical Navigation System Based on Multi-View Virtual and Real Registration Technology Fengfeng Zhang, Long Chen, Wenhua Miao, Lining Sun IEEE Access.2020; 8: 122511. CrossRef
In Reply to the Letter to the Editor Regarding “Enhancing Reality: A Systematic Review of Augmented Reality in Neuronavigation and Education” Shervin Rahimpour, James Cho, C. Rory Goodwin, Patrick Codd World Neurosurgery.2020; 140: 432. CrossRef
In Reply: Image-Guided Navigation and Robotics in Spine Surgery Ryan B Kochanski, John E O’Toole Neurosurgery.2020; 87(6): E722. CrossRef
Interventional Techniques for Bone and Musculoskeletal Soft Tissue Tumors: Current Practices and Future Directions – Part II. Stabilization Danoob Dalili, Amanda Isaac, Roberto Luigi Cazzato, Gunnar Åström, Jonas Bergh, Ramy Mansour, Marc-André Weber, Julien Garnon, Afshin Gangi Seminars in Musculoskeletal Radiology.2020; 24(06): 710. CrossRef
First
Prev
