Spine surgery has experienced much technological innovation over the past several decades. The field has seen advancements in operative techniques, implants and biologics, and equipment such as computer-assisted navigation and surgical robotics. With the arrival of real-time image guidance and navigation capabilities along with the computing ability to process and reconstruct these data into an interactive three-dimensional spinal "map", so too have the applications of surgical robotic technology. While spinal robotics and navigation represent promising potential for improving modern spinal surgery, it remains paramount to demonstrate its superiority as compared to traditional techniques prior to assimilation of its use amongst surgeons.The applications for intraoperative navigation and image-guided robotics have expanded to surgical resection of spinal column and intradural tumors, revision procedures on arthrodesed spines, and deformity cases with distorted anatomy. Additionally, these platforms may mitigate much of the harmful radiation exposure in minimally invasive surgery to which the patient, surgeon, and ancillary operating room staff are subjected.Spine surgery relies upon meticulous fine motor skills to manipulate neural elements and a steady hand while doing so, often exploiting small working corridors utilizing exposures that minimize collateral damage. Additionally, the procedures may be long and arduous, predisposing the surgeon to both mental and physical fatigue. In light of these characteristics, spine surgery may actually be an ideal candidate for the integration of navigation and robotic-assisted procedures.With this paper, we aim to critically evaluate the current literature and explore the options available for intraoperative navigation and robotic-assisted spine surgery.

Study Design:Review article.Objectives:A review of the literature on postoperative spinal infections, their diagnosis, and management.Methods:A systematic computerized Medline literature search was performed using PubMed, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and EMBASE. The electronic databases were searched for publication dates from the last 10 years. The searches were performed from Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) used by the National Library of Medicine. Specifically, MeSH terms “spine,” “infections,” “management,” and “diagnosis” were used.Results:Currently, the gold standard for diagnosis of postoperative spine infection is positive deep wound culture. Many of the current radiologic and laboratory tests can assist with the initial diagnosis and monitoring treatment response. Currently erythrocyte sedimentation rate, C-reactive protein, computed tomography scan, and magnetic resonance imaging with and without contrast are used in combination to establish diagnosis. Management of postoperative spine infection involves thorough surgical debridement and targeted antibiotic therapy.Conclusions:Postoperative spine infection is a not uncommon complication following surgery that may have devastating consequences for a patient’s short- and long-term health. A high index of suspicion is needed to make an early diagnosis.

Study Design Systematic literature review and meta-analysis of studies published in English. Objective This study evaluated differences in outcome variables between percutaneous and open pedicle screws for traumatic thoracolumbar fractures. Methods A systematic review of PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase was performed. The variables of interest included postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) pain score, kyphosis angle, and vertebral body height, as well as intraoperative blood loss and operative time. The results were pooled by calculating the effect size based on the standardized difference in means. The studies were weighted by the inverse of the variance, which included both within- and between-study error. Confidence intervals were reported at 95%. Heterogeneity was assessed using the Q statistic and I 2. Results After two-reviewer assessment, 38 studies were eliminated. Six studies were found to meet inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. The combined effect size was found to be in favor of percutaneous fixation for blood loss and operative time (p < 0.05); however, there were no differences in vertebral body height (VBH), kyphosis angle, or VAS scores between open and percutaneous fixation. All of the studies demonstrated relative homogeneity, with I 2 < 25. Conclusions Patients with thoracolumbar fractures can be effectively managed with percutaneous or open pedicle screw placement. There are no differences in VBH, kyphosis angle, or VAS between the two groups. Blood loss and operative time were decreased in the percutaneous group, which may represent a potential benefit, particularly in the polytraumatized patient. All variables in this study demonstrated near-perfect homogeneity, and the effect is likely close to the true effect.