Image guidance (IG) and robotic-assisted (RA) surgery are modern technological advancements that have provided novel ways to perform precise and accurate spinal surgery. These innovations supply real-time, three-dimensional imaging information to aid in instrumentation, decompression, and implant placement. Although nothing can replace the knowledge and expertise of an experienced spine surgeon, these platforms do have the potential to supplement the individual surgeon's capabilities. Specific advantages include more precise pedicle screw placement, minimally invasive surgery with less reliance on intraoperative fluoroscopy, and lower radiation exposure to the surgeon and staff. As these technologies have become more widely adopted over the years, novel uses such as tumor resection have been explored. Disadvantages include the cost of implementing IG and robotics platforms, the initial learning curve for both the surgeon and the staff, and increased patient radiation exposure in scoliosis surgery. Also, given the relatively recent transition of many procedures from inpatient settings to ambulatory surgery centers, access to current devices may be cost prohibitive and not as readily available at some centers. Regarding patient-related outcomes, much further research is warranted. The short-term benefits of minimally invasive surgery often bolster the perioperative and early postoperative outcomes in many retrospective studies on IG and RA surgery. Randomized controlled trials limiting such confounding factors are warranted to definitively show potential independent improvements in patient-related outcomes specifically attributable to IG and RA alone. Nonetheless, irrespective of these current unknowns, it is clear that these technologies have changed the field and the practice of spine surgery. Surgeons should be familiar with the potential benefits and tradeoffs of these platforms when considering adopting IG and robotics in their practices.

Publishing original peer-reviewed research is essential for advancement through all career stages. Fewer women than men hold senior-level positions in academic medicine and, therefore, examining publication trends relative to gender is important. The goal of this study was to examine and compare publication trends in The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (JBJS) and The Bone and Joint Journal (BJJ) with a particular emphasis on trends regarding author gender. Data was collected and analyzed for manuscripts published in JBJS and BJJ over the past 30 years. For manuscripts published in 1986, 1996, 2006, and 2016, we recorded the numbers of authors, manuscript pages, references, collaborating institutions, the position in the byline of the corresponding author, the country of the corresponding author, and the names of the first and corresponding author. We also calculated the normalized number of citations and corresponding author position. The number of authors, institutions, and countries collaborating on manuscripts published in both JBJS and BJJ increased over time. JBJS published more manuscripts from North America and BJJ published more manuscripts from Europe. In both journals, the percentage of women as first and/or corresponding author increased over time. Trends over the past 30 years have shown increased collaborations with greater citations in manuscripts published in JBJS and BJJ. In the same time period, both journals demonstrated a rise in the percentage of manuscripts with women first and/or corresponding authors, suggesting a decrease in the gender gap.