The Role of Agentic AI in Musculoskeletal Radiology: A Scoping Review Jonathan Gibson, Praveen Chinniah, Shashank Chapala, Ojasvi Vemuri, Rajesh Botchu Computers.2026; 15(2): 89. CrossRef
Agentic Artificial Intelligence in Cosmetic Dermatology Mohamad Goldust Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology.2026;[Epub] CrossRef
Leveraging Advanced AI Frameworks for Dual PPAR α/γ Agonist Discovery in Alzheimer’s Disease Navaneet Chaturvedi, Vaibhav Mishra, Shafiul Haque, Sabiha Khatoon, Kamal Rawal, Vijay Kumar ACS Chemical Neuroscience.2026;[Epub] CrossRef
Current Applications and Future Directions of Technologies Used in Adult Deformity Surgery for Personalized Alignment: A Narrative Review Janet Hsu, Taikhoom M. Dahodwala, Noel O. Akioyamen, Evan Mostafa, Rami Z. AbuQubo, Xiuyi Alexander Yang, Priya K. Singh, Daniel C. Berman, Rafael De la Garza Ramos, Yaroslav Gelfand, Saikiran G. Murthy, Jonathan D. Krystal, Ananth S. Eleswarapu, Mitchell Journal of Personalized Medicine.2025; 15(10): 480. CrossRef
The Development and Evaluation of a Retrieval-Augmented Generation Large Language Model Virtual Assistant for Postoperative Instructions Syed Ali Haider, Srinivasagam Prabha, Cesar Abraham Gomez Cabello, Ariana Genovese, Bernardo Collaco, Nadia Wood, James London, Sanjay Bagaria, Cui Tao, Antonio Jorge Forte Bioengineering.2025; 12(11): 1219. CrossRef
Objective This study aimed to evaluate the clinical and radiological outcomes of unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression (ULBD) using biportal endoscopic spinal surgery (BESS) in patients with central canal stenosis, with and without low-grade degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS).
Methods A retrospective observational study was conducted on 170 patients who underwent BESS-ULBD between 2015 and 2018, with at least 2 years of follow-up. Patients were categorized into 2 groups: group A (68 patients) with central stenosis and low-grade DLS and group B (102 patients) with central stenosis alone. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the visual analogue scale (VAS) for back and leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and Modified MacNab criteria. Radiological assessments included sagittal translation measurements on dynamic flexion-extension radiographs.
Results Both groups significantly improved clinical outcomes at the final follow-up (p<0.05). Group A’s mean VAS scores improved from 3.8±2.4 to 1.9±2.0 for back pain and from 6.4±1.8 to 2.3±2.0 for leg pain. In group B, back pain improved from 3.9±2.5 to 1.7±1.9, and leg pain from 6.6±2.0 to 2.2±2.2. ODI scores also improved significantly in both groups. Radiological evaluation showed no significant changes in sagittal translation postoperatively, indicating preserved spinal stability. Both groups had comparable clinical outcomes, with no major complications reported.
Conclusion BESS-ULBD is a safe and effective minimally invasive option for managing central canal stenosis, with or without low-grade DLS. This technique provides substantial symptom relief, preserves spinal stability, and presents a promising alternative to more invasive fusion procedures in carefully selected patients.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Future Directions in the Treatment of Lumbar Spondylolisthesis Parikshit Juvekar, Susan Christopher, Zoher Ghogawala Neurosurgery Clinics of North America.2026; 37(1): 143. CrossRef
Trends in Utilization and Cost of Endoscopic Lumbar Decompression in Ambulatory Surgical Centers: A Nationwide Database Analysis From 2018 Through 2022 Mitchell K. Ng, Paul G. Mastrokostas, Leonidas E. Mastrokostas, Aaron B. Lavi, Luke B. Schwartz, Yasmine K. Eichbaum, Yulia Lee, Morgan Hitchner, William Green, Gregorio Baek, Joshua Mathew, Jonathan Dalton, Alec Giakas, Rajendra Singh, Afshin E. Razi, Ia Global Spine Journal.2026; 16(5): 2252. CrossRef
A Commentary on “International Practice Patterns in the Surgical Management of Primary Lumbar Disc Herniation: An AO Spine Cross-Sectional Study” Jin-Sung Kim Neurospine.2026; 23(1): 40. CrossRef
Response to the letter to the editor: Inconsistencies in obesity criteria: implications for systematic reviews on endoscopic spine surgery Wongthawat Liawrungrueang, Watcharaporn Cholamjiak, Peem Sarasombath, Yudha Mathan Sakti, Pang Hung Wu, Meng-Huang Wu, Yu-Jen Lu, Lo Cho Yau, Zenya Ito, Sung Tan Cho, Dong-Gune Chang, Kang Taek Lim Asian Spine Journal.2026; 20(1): 211. CrossRef
Targeted Decompression Under Local Anesthesia versus Extensive Decompression Under General Anesthesia for Octogenarians with Lumbar Degenerative Diseases: A Real-World Propensity Score-Matched Analysis Hang Zhang, Huili Cai, Yunzhong Cheng, Xuelin Li, Yang Liu, Fengping Liu, Jingchuan Sun, Haidan Chen Clinical Interventions in Aging.2026; Volume 21: 1. CrossRef
Application of minimally invasive decompression interventions for the surgical treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolysthesis P. Remov, A. Babkin, S. Zalepugin, A. Mazurenko, S. Jurchenko, A. Malashenko, A. Kartyzhova, Yu. Aniskevich, D. Sackevich Healthcare.2026; (5): 4. CrossRef
Advancing Endoscopic Decompression in Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis – A Commentary on “Biportal Endoscopic Decompression for Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis With Stenosis” Jin-Sung Kim Neurospine.2025; 22(2): 566. CrossRef
Clinical outcomes of navigation-assisted versus fluoroscopy-guided UBE-ULBD in single-level lumbar spinal stenosis: a retrospective study Shi-Jie Liu, Si-Yuan Yao, Yao Zhang, Wan-Cheng lin, Li-Xiang Ding, Ji-Peng Song BMC Surgery.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Objective Full endoscopic cervical surgery (FECS) is an evolving minimally invasive approach for treating cervical spine disorders. This systematic review synthesizes current evidence on the clinical outcomes and patient perspectives associated with FECS, specifically evaluating its safety, efficacy, and overall patient satisfaction.
Methods A systematic search of the PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science databases was conducted following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Studies published between January 2000 and September 2024 that reported on clinical outcomes or patient perspectives related to FECS were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-I (Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies - of Interventions) tool and the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Inclusion criteria encompassed randomized controlled trials, prospective cohort studies, retrospective studies, and observational studies focused on adult populations undergoing FECS for cervical spine surgery.
Results The final synthesis included 30 studies. FECS was associated with significant reductions in both cervical and radicular pain, as well as meaningful functional improvements, measured by standardized clinical scales such as the Neck Disability Index and visual analogue scale. Patient satisfaction rates were consistently high, with most studies reporting satisfaction exceeding 85%. Complication rates were low, primarily involving transient neurological deficits that were typically resolved without the need for further intervention. Nonrandomized studies generally presented a moderate risk of bias due to confounding and selection, whereas randomized controlled trials exhibited a low risk of bias.
Conclusion FECS is a safe and effective minimally invasive surgical option for cervical spine disorders associated with substantial pain relief, functional improvement and high levels of patient satisfaction.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Response to the letter to the editor: Inconsistencies in obesity criteria: implications for systematic reviews on endoscopic spine surgery Wongthawat Liawrungrueang, Watcharaporn Cholamjiak, Peem Sarasombath, Yudha Mathan Sakti, Pang Hung Wu, Meng-Huang Wu, Yu-Jen Lu, Lo Cho Yau, Zenya Ito, Sung Tan Cho, Dong-Gune Chang, Kang Taek Lim Asian Spine Journal.2026; 20(1): 211. CrossRef
Full-Endoscopic Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy and Discectomy for Cervical Disc Hernia With Unilateral Radiculopathy Idris Gurpinar, Mehmet Yigit Akgun, Furkan Almas, Ozkan Ates Journal of Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery and Technique.2026; 11(1): 149. CrossRef
Clinical and Functional Outcomes of Posterior Endoscopic Decompression for Symptomatic Cervical Disc Herniation Adam Mahendra Teja, Muhammed Anzar, Cheol Wung Park Cureus.2026;[Epub] CrossRef
Ultrasound-guided brachial plexus hydrodissection combined with acupotomy release for the treatment of cervical spondylotic radiculopathy: a multicenter retrospective study Xiang Shang, Guo-Rui Luan, Yang-Chun Song, Fen Zhang, San-Bing Wu, Kai Geng, Hou-Shan Fang, Wei Wei, Zhen-Ya Wang, Han-Qing Zhao, Yong-Hui Yang, De-Hong Meng Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience.2026;[Epub] CrossRef
Current Trends and Future Directions in Lumbar Spine Surgery: A Review of Emerging Techniques and Evolving Management Paradigms Gianluca Galieri, Vittorio Orlando, Roberto Altieri, Manlio Barbarisi, Alessandro Olivi, Giovanni Sabatino, Giuseppe La Rocca Journal of Clinical Medicine.2025; 14(10): 3390. CrossRef
Navigated Minimally Invasive Cervical and Cervicothoracic Fixation: A Technical Note on Surgical Technique and Proposed Classification Spyridon Komaitis, Konstantinos Zygogiannis, Sotirios Karatzoglou, Dimitrios Klitsinikos, Dritan Pasku, Khalid Salem Cureus.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Objective To compare clinical and radiographic outcomes between 2 motion preservation surgeries, cervical disc replacement (CDR) and posterior endoscopic cervical decompression (PECD), for unilateral cervical radiculopathy.
Methods Between February 2018 and December 2020, 60 patients with unilateral cervical radiculopathy who underwent either CDR or PECD were retrospectively recruited as matched pairs. Clinical outcomes included visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for neck and arm pain, Neck Disability Index (NDI), and satisfaction rates. The radiographic outcome was index level motion. Intraoperative data, complications, and hospital stay were collected. Preoperative and postoperative outcomes were compared.
Results Patients undergoing CDR or PECD were included, with 30 cases in each group. Matched pairs were compared in terms of demographic data and preoperative measurements. CDR was associated with shorter operative times, whereas PECD resulted in less intraoperative blood loss. The total complication rate was 5%. NDI and VAS for neck and arm were significantly improved in both groups, with no significant differences between the 2 groups. Satisfaction rates of good and excellent exceeded 87% in both groups. CDR was superior to PECD in the restoration of disc height. Early postoperative follow-up showed no significant difference in terms of index level motion. PECD demonstrated significantly shorter hospital stays and quicker return-to-work times (p<0.05).
Conclusion PECD achieved equivalent clinical and radiologic outcomes compared with CDR when the certain criteria for surgery were met. Both techniques demonstrated the potential to maintain index level motion. Additionally, PECD resulted in less blood loss, shorter hospital stays, and faster return-to-work times. Conversely, CDR offered shorter operative times and better restoration of disc height.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Delta large-channel endoscopy versus unilateral biportal endoscopy for cervicothoracic junction disc herniation: a prospective randomized controlled trial Huaibin Wang, Hui Li, Rushuo Wei, Hao Yan, Ruzhan Yao, Weiqiang Liu, Ling Li Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research.2026;[Epub] CrossRef
Cervical disc arthroplasty versus minimally invasive posterior cervical procedures as motion preserving surgeries for cervical radiculopathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis Jia Yi Loh, Xian Jun Ngoh, Zhihong Chew, Yee Gen Lim, Michael Janssen, Jiang Lei European Spine Journal.2026;[Epub] CrossRef
Comparison of surgical outcomes between posterior percutaneous endoscopic cervical discectomy and microscope-assisted ACDF in patients with single-level unilateral radicular symptomatology of cervical disc herniation: a single-center retrospective study Yin He, Jing Zhang, Dawei Ren, Tianping Xi, Zhilin Li European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology.2026;[Epub] CrossRef
Clinical Outcomes and Patient Perspectives in Full Endoscopic Cervical Surgery: A Systematic Review Wongthawat Liawrungrueang, Sung Tan Cho, Ayush Sharma, Watcharaporn Cholamjiak, Meng-Huang Wu, Lo Cho Yau, Hyun-Jin Park, Ho-Jin Lee Neurospine.2025; 22(1): 81. CrossRef
Advancing the future of endoscopic spine surgery Wongthawat Liawrungrueang Asian Spine Journal.2025; 19(2): IX. CrossRef
Objective To develop and evaluate a technique using convolutional neural networks (CNNs) for the computer-assisted diagnosis of cervical spine fractures from radiographic x-ray images. By leveraging deep learning techniques, the study might potentially lead to improved patient outcomes and clinical decision-making.
Methods This study obtained 500 lateral radiographic cervical spine x-ray images from standard open-source dataset repositories to develop a classification model using CNNs. All the images contained diagnostic information, including normal cervical radiographic images (n=250) and fracture images of the cervical spine fracture (n=250). The model would classify whether the patient had a cervical spine fracture or not. Seventy percent of the images were training data sets used for model training, and 30% were for testing. Konstanz Information Miner (KNIME)’s graphic user interface-based programming enabled class label annotation, data preprocessing, CNNs model training, and performance evaluation.
Results The performance evaluation of a model for detecting cervical spine fractures presents compelling results across various metrics. This model exhibits high sensitivity (recall) values of 0.886 for fractures and 0.957 for normal cases, indicating its proficiency in identifying true positives. Precision values of 0.954 for fractures and 0.893 for normal cases highlight the model’s ability to minimize false positives. With specificity values of 0.957 for fractures and 0.886 for normal cases, the model effectively identifies true negatives. The overall accuracy of 92.14% highlights its reliability in correctly classifying cases by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve.
Conclusion We successfully used deep learning models for computer-assisted diagnosis of cervical spine fractures from radiographic x-ray images. This approach can assist the radiologist in screening, detecting, and diagnosing cervical spine fractures.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
A Multi-Context Squeeze-Excitation Framework with Explainable Attention for Cervical Spine Fracture Detection in CT Imaging M. Anitha, P. Tamije Selvy Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Electrical Engineering.2026; 50(2): 1457. CrossRef
Artificial intelligence in spine surgery: a scoping review Anis Choucha, Morgane Evin, Matteo de Simone, Guillaume Dannhoff, Henry Dufour, Valentin Avinens, Kaissar Farah, Florian Saby, Stephane Fuentes Neurochirurgie.2026; 72(1): 101764. CrossRef
Contrastive Learning-Driven Representation and Feature Selection for Spinal Fracture Detection on CT Images Hasan Genç, Canan Koç, Esra Yüzgeç Özdemír, Fatíh Özyurt IEEE Access.2026; 14: 8047. CrossRef
Clinical Application of Deep Learning for Spine MRI Interpretation: A Multicenter Evaluation of Artificial-Intelligence-Assisted versus Manual Reading on Diagnostic Agreement with the Reference Standard Xing Cheng, Maoping Zhang, Zhenxiao Ren, Tang Tang, Xiaolin Meng, Zhong Huang, Hongwei Bran Li, Weiguo Li, Qiuchan Yan, Haixiong Chen, Jie Jia, Ce Wang, Cheng Li, Chunshan Yang, Guifeng Shi, Guohua Li, Kaixin Zeng, Wei Chen, Haoxuan Gao, Xiaobo Wang, Xin Research.2026;[Epub] CrossRef
A two-stage deep learning system for cervical spine fracture diagnosis: integrating 3D segmentation and 2.5D classification on CT images Renyi Lu, Yuying Feng, Ruozhou Wang, Ting Song European Spine Journal.2026;[Epub] CrossRef
Diagnostic performance of artificial intelligence for identification of cervical spine fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis Ali Gholamrezanezhad, Mehrdad Farrokhi, Sami Almasri, Hadis Askari, Ali Askari, Seyed Arshia Mirjafarifiroozabadi, Mohammad Amin Nochian, Eashan Kosaraju Emergency Radiology.2026; 33(4): 889. CrossRef
ShuffleLeNet architecture for spinal cord injury classification and level detection Vinod Biradar, Kuppala Saritha, Anusha Preetham European Spine Journal.2026;[Epub] CrossRef
Artificial Intelligence for Cervical Spine Fracture Detection: A Systematic Review of Diagnostic Performance and Clinical Potential Wongthawat Liawrungrueang, Watcharaporn Cholamjiak, Arunee Promsri, Khanathip Jitpakdee, Sompoom Sunpaweravong, Vit Kotheeranurak, Peem Sarasombath Global Spine Journal.2025; 15(4): 2547. CrossRef
Performance and clinical implications of machine learning models for detecting cervical ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament: a systematic review Wongthawat Liawrungrueang, Sung Tan Cho, Watcharaporn Cholamjiak, Peem Sarasombath, Nattaphon Twinprai, Prin Twinprai, Inbo Han Asian Spine Journal.2025; 19(1): 148. CrossRef
Cervical vertebral body segmentation in X-ray and magnetic resonance imaging based on YOLO-UNet: Automatic segmentation approach and available tool Hongyan Wang, Jie Lu, Song Yang, Yin Xiao, Liangliang He, Zhi Dou, Wenxing Zhao, Liqiang Yang DIGITAL HEALTH.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Artificial Intelligence (AI) Agents Versus Agentic AI: What’s the Effect in Spine Surgery? Wongthawat Liawrungrueang Neurospine.2025; 22(2): 473. CrossRef
Fully automated pedicle screw manufacturer identification in plain radiograph with deep learning methods Rattapoom Waranusast, Panomkhawn Riyamongkol, Santi Weerakul, Nattharut Chaibhuddanugul, Artit Laoruengthana, Akaworn Mahatthanatrakul European Spine Journal.2025; 34(9): 3940. CrossRef
Cross-modality image-to-image translation from MR to synthetic 18F-FDOPA PET/MR fusion images using conditional GAN in brain cancer Youngbeom Seo, Heesung Yang, Eunjung Kong, Vivek Sanker, Atman Desai, Jungwon Lee, So Hee Park, You Seon Song, Ikchan Jeon Neuroradiology.2025; 67(10): 2727. CrossRef
Artificial intelligence in orthopedic trauma: a comprehensive review Abdulhamit Misir Injury.2025; 56(8): 112570. CrossRef
Advancing Spine Fracture Detection: The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Clinical Practice Seonghoon Jeong, Byung-Jou Lee Korean Journal of Neurotrauma.2025; 21(3): 172. CrossRef
Intelligence Architectures and Machine Learning Applications in Contemporary Spine Care Rahul Kumar, Conor Dougherty, Kyle Sporn, Akshay Khanna, Puja Ravi, Pranay Prabhakar, Nasif Zaman Bioengineering.2025; 12(9): 967. CrossRef
The evolution of cervical spine trauma classification: a paradigm shift from morphological description to clinical decision-making Xihao Huang, Yihong Zhang, Haowei Xiao, Jinlong Chen, Yu Jiang Frontiers in Neurology.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
From the Editor-in-Chief: Featured Articles in the September 2024 Issue Inbo Han Neurospine.2024; 21(3): 743. CrossRef
Commentary on “Artificial Intelligence Detection of Cervical Spine Fractures Using Convolutional Neural Network Models” Yu-Cheng Yeh, Fon-Yih Tsuang Neurospine.2024; 21(3): 842. CrossRef
Objective To determine the ideal Atlas (C1) lateral mass screw placement and trajectory using the intersection between the lateral mass and inferomedial edge of the posterior arch as an easily identifiable and reproducible medial reference point. Selection of an ideal entry point and trajectory of C1 lateral mass screw insertion can help to minimize neurovascular injuries. While various techniques for screw insertion have been proposed in the past, they all require extensive dissection of the C1 lateral mass, which can cause profuse bleeding.
Methods Ninety-three 3-dimensional computed tomography reconstructed images of C1 lateral masses in adult patients were utilized to simulate the placement of C1 lateral mass screws via 4 entry points and 2 trajectory angles referencing off of a medial reference point using Vero’s VISI 17 software. The safety during screw insertion simulation, as well as the screw length, were evaluated.
Results We found that C1 lateral mass screws could be safely placed bilaterally at 3 mm lateral to the reference point in both 0° and 15° medial screw angulation without violation of the cortex. The 15° medial angulation allowed for longer (18 mm) screws than the 0° angulation.
Conclusion We recommend starting C1 lateral mass screws 3 mm lateral to the intersection between the lateral mass and inferomedial edge of the posterior arch at a 15° medial angulation.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Biomechanical differences between occipital plate and modified C1 lateral mass screw in the treatment of complex craniocervical malformations: a finite element analysis Chenpeng Dong, Zhiqiang Xu, Xintong Ran, Cao Yang, Xinghuo Wu European Spine Journal.2026;[Epub] CrossRef
Surgical Risk in Bicortical C1 Lateral Mass Screw Fixation Without Medial Angulation Teera Tangviriyapaiboon, Sitthisak Phupungtamakoon, Ekkapot Jitpun, Varisa Wongbhanuwich Journal of the Medical Association of Thailand.2026; 6(109): 525. CrossRef
Determining anatomically-safe corridors for placement of lateral mass screws in the first cervical vertebra of the Emirati population – a CT study Dineshwary Suresh, Nerissa Naidoo, Rashid AlSharhan, Usama Al Bastaki, Jeyaseelan Lakshmanan, Baylis Vivek Joseph, Ivan James Prithishkumar Scientific Reports.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Morphometric analysis of the lateral mass of atlas and its clinical significance in craniovertebral junction surgeries Noor Us Saba, Mohd Faheem, Heena Singh, Pratibha Shakya, Navneet Kumar Surgical Neurology International.2025; 16: 83. CrossRef
Feasibility of transpedicular screw placement through the posterior arch of C1: A CT study in the Emirati population Ivan James Prithishkumar, Dineshwary Suresh, Nerissa Naidoo, Rashid AlSharhan, Usama Al Bastaki, Jeyaseelan Lakshmanan, Baylis Vivek Joseph Translational Research in Anatomy.2025; 39: 100384. CrossRef
Atlas (C1) lateral mass screw placement using the intersection between lateral mass and inferomedial edge of the posterior arch: a cadaveric study Wongthawat Liawrungrueang, K. Daniel Riew, Nantawit Sugandhavesa, Torphong Bunmaprasert European Spine Journal.2022; 31(12): 3443. CrossRef
Surgical Versus Conservative Management for Treating Unstable Atlas Fractures: A Multicenter Study Jun Jae Shin, Kwang-Ryeol Kim, Joongkyum Shin, Jiin Kang, Ho Jin Lee, Tae Woo Kim, Jae Taek Hong, Sang-Woo Kim, Yoon Ha Neurospine.2022; 19(4): 1013. CrossRef
First
Prev
