In recent years, with the rapid advancement and consumerization of virtual reality, augmented reality, mixed reality, and extended reality (XR) technology, the use of XR technology in spine medicine has also become increasingly popular. The rising use of XR technology in spine medicine has also been accelerated by the recent wave of digital transformation (i.e., case-specific three-dimensional medical images and holograms, wearable sensors, video cameras, fifth generation, artificial intelligence, and head-mounted displays), and further accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic and the increase in minimally invasive spine surgery. The COVID-19 pandemic has a negative impact on society, but positive impacts can also be expected, including the continued spread and adoption of telemedicine services (i.e., tele-education, tele-surgery, tele-rehabilitation) that promote digital transformation. The purpose of this narrative review is to describe the accelerators of XR (VR, AR, MR) technology in spine medicine and then to provide a comprehensive review of the use of XR technology in spine medicine, including surgery, consultation, education, and rehabilitation, as well as to identify its limitations and future perspectives (status quo and quo vadis).

The present study suggests that the static factors of a reduction in the lumbar lordotic angle and greater posterior pelvic tilt, the dynamic factors of small ΔLL values and large ΔPIA values and the complex interaction of these two types of factors, may play important roles in the development of RDC.

In the past two decades, minimally invasive spine surgery (MISS) techniques have been developed for spinal surgery. Historically, minimizing invasiveness in decompression surgery was initially reported as a MISS technique. In recent years, MISS techniques have also been applied for spinal stabilization techniques, which were defined as minimally invasive spine stabilization (MISt), including percutaneous pedicle screws (PPS) fixation, lateral lumbar interbody fusion, balloon kyphoplasty, percutaneous vertebroplasty, cortical bone trajectory, and cervical total disc replacement. These MISS techniques typically provide many advantages such as preservation of paraspinal musculature, less blood loss, a shorter operative time, less postoperative pain, and a lower infection rate as well as being more cost-effective compared to traditional open techniques. However, even MISS techniques are associated with several limitations including technical difficulty, training opportunities, surgical cost, equipment cost, and radiation exposure. These downsides of surgical treatments make conservative treatments more feasible option. In the future, medicine must become “minimally invasive” in the broadest sense—for all patients, conventional surgeries, medical personnel, hospital management, nursing care, and the medical economy. As a new framework for the treatment of spinal diseases, the concept of minimally invasive spinal treatment (MIST) has been proposed.

Locomotive syndrome (LS) is defined based on the Loco-Check, 25-question Geriatric Locomotive Function Scale (GLFS-25), 5-question Geriatric Locomotive Function Scale (GLFS-5), Stand-Up Test, Two-Step Test, or a total assessment (i.e., positive for one or more of the GLFS-25, Stand-Up Test, and Two-Step Test). Lumbar spine disease has been reported to be one of the most common musculoskeletal disorders leading to LS. We therefore conducted a systematic review via PubMed, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and MEDLINE, based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A total of 26 studies were considered to be eligible for inclusion in this systematic review. The GLFS-25 showed an association with low back pain, sagittal spinopelvic malalignment, and lumbar spinal stenosis but not vertebral fracture. The GLFS-5 showed an association with low back pain and lumbar spinal stenosis. The Loco-Check and Two-Step Test showed an association with low back pain, sagittal spinopelvic malalignment, and lumbar spinal stenosis. The Stand-Up Test showed no association with lumbar spinal stenosis. The total assessment showed an association with low back pain and lumbar spinal stenosis. Furthermore, the GLFS-25, Two-Step Test, and total assessment were improved by spinal surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis. The current evidence concerning the relationship between LS and lumbar spine disease still seems insufficient, so further investigations are required on this topic.

Since Offierski and MacNab reported a close association between the hip and spine as hip–spine syndrome in 1983, many studies on spinal alignment in hip disorders have been conducted. Notably, the pelvic incidence angle (PI) is the most important parameter and is determined by the anatomical variations in the sacroiliac joint and hip. Studies on the association of the PI with hip disorders can help in understanding the pathophysiology of hip–spine syndrome. A PI increase has been observed during the evolution of bipedal locomotion in humans and in the acquisition of gait during child development. Although the PI is a fixed parameter that is stable and unaffected by posture from adulthood onwards, it has become clear that it increases in the standing position in older people. While it may be associated with a greater risk of developing or progressing to spinal disorders, the association between the PI and hip disorders remains controversial because of the multifactorial nature of hip osteoarthritis (HOA) and the wide range of PIs in HOA (18–96°), making the interpretation of results difficult. However, several hip disorders (i.e., femoroacetabular impingement and rapid destructive coxarthrosis) have been shown to be associated with the PI. Further investigation on this topic is, therefore, warranted.