1.Pseudarthrosis of the Cervical Spine: Risk Factors, Diagnosis and Management.
Asian Spine Journal 2016;10(4):776-786
Cervical myelopathy and radiculopathy are common pathologies that often improve with spinal decompression and fusion. Postoperative complications include pseudarthrosis, which can be challenging to diagnose and manage. We reviewed the literature with regard to risk factors, diagnosis, controversies, and management of cervical pseudarthrosis.
Decompression
;
Diagnosis*
;
Pathology
;
Postoperative Complications
;
Pseudarthrosis*
;
Radiculopathy
;
Risk Factors*
;
Spinal Cord Diseases
;
Spine*
2.Innovative Developments in Lumbar Interbody Cage Materials and Design: A Comprehensive Narrative Review
Sam Yeol CHANG ; Dong-Ho KANG ; Samuel K. CHO
Asian Spine Journal 2024;18(3):444-457
This review comprehensively examines the evolution and current state of interbody cage technology for lumbar interbody fusion (LIF). This review highlights the biomechanical and clinical implications of the transition from traditional static cage designs to advanced expandable variants for spinal surgery. The review begins by exploring the early developments in cage materials, highlighting the roles of titanium and polyetheretherketone in the advancement of LIF techniques. This review also discusses the strengths and limitations of these materials, leading to innovations in surface modifications and the introduction of novel materials, such as tantalum, as alternative materials. Advancements in three-dimensional printing and surface modification technologies form a significant part of this review, emphasizing the role of these technologies in enhancing the biomechanical compatibility and osseointegration of interbody cages. In addition, this review explores the increase in biodegradable and composite materials such as polylactic acid and polycaprolactone, addressing their potential to mitigate long-term implant-related complications. A critical evaluation of static and expandable cages is presented, including their respective clinical and radiological outcomes. While static cages have been a mainstay of LIF, expandable cages are noted for their adaptability to the patient’s anatomy, reducing complications such as cage subsidence. However, this review highlights the ongoing debate and the lack of conclusive evidence regarding the superiority of either cage type in terms of clinical outcomes. Finally, this review proposes future directions for cage technology, focusing on the integration of bioactive substances and multifunctional coatings and the development of patient-specific implants. These advancements aim to further enhance the efficacy, safety, and personalized approach of spinal fusion surgeries. Moreover, this review offers a nuanced understanding of the evolving landscape of cage technology in LIF and provides insights into current practices and future possibilities in spinal surgery.
3.History of Spinal Deformity Surgery Part II: The Modern Era.
Korean Journal of Spine 2011;8(1):9-23
Following Dwyer introduction of anterior spinal instrumented fusion surgery, Zielke, Moss-Miami, and Kaneda had made a significant progression on anterior spinal instrumented fusion which allowed excellent correction without significant loss of correction or implant failure. King and Moe deveoped classification of thoracic major curve following Harrington rod intrumentation. King classification presented a stable vertebra concept and selective fusion concept. Surgical classification of Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis (AIS) developed by Harms study group provided a more sophisticated two dimensional understanding of curve nature. Surgical intervention of adult scoliosis and sagittal imbalance is still challenging and evolving. Several evidences such as sacropelvic fixation and bone morphogenetic protein helped us to deal with adult deformity. The surgical decision making on spinal deformity surgery is still yet evolving.
Adolescent
;
Adult
;
Bone Morphogenetic Proteins
;
Congenital Abnormalities
;
Decision Making
;
Humans
;
Scoliosis
;
Spine
4.History of Spinal Deformity Surgery Part I: The Pre-modern Era.
Korean Journal of Spine 2011;8(1):1-8
Spinal deformity is one of the oldest known diseases that date back thousands of years in human history. It appears in fairy tales and mythologies in association with evil as its dramatic appearance in patients suffering from the disease easily lent itself to be thought of as a form of divine retribution. The history of spinal deformity dates back to prehistoric times. The early attempts to treat patients suffering from this disease started from Hippocrates age. Side traction or axial traction and cast immobilization were the only possible option prior to the discovery of anesthesia. The first surgical attempts to correct scoliosis occurred in the mid 19th century with percutaneous myotomies of the vertebral musculature followed by postoperative bracing, which outcomes were very quite horrifying. Hibbs' fusion operation had become a realistic treatment option to halt the progression of deformity in the early 20th century. Harrington's introduction of the internal fixation device to treat paralytic scoliosis in 1960's started revolution on deformity correction surgery. Luque developed a segmental spinal using sublaminar wiring technique in 1976 and Cotrel developed Cotrel-Dubousset (CD) instrumentation, which was a posterior segmental instrumentation system that used pedicle and laminar hooks on either thoracic or lumbar spine and pedicle screws on the lumbar spine.
Anesthesia
;
Braces
;
Chronology as Topic
;
Congenital Abnormalities
;
Humans
;
Immobilization
;
Internal Fixators
;
Scoliosis
;
Spine
;
Stress, Psychological
;
Traction
5.Decision Making Algorithm for Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery.
Yongjung J KIM ; Seung Jae HYUN ; Gene CHEH ; Samuel K CHO ; Seung Chul RHIM
Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society 2016;59(4):327-333
Adult spinal deformity (ASD) is one of the most challenging spinal disorders associated with broad range of clinical and radiological presentation. Correct selection of fusion levels in surgical planning for the management of adult spinal deformity is a complex task. Several classification systems and algorithms exist to assist surgeons in determining the appropriate levels to be instrumented. In this study, we describe our new simple decision making algorithm and selection of fusion level for ASD surgery in terms of adult idiopathic idiopathic scoliosis vs. degenerative scoliosis.
Adult*
;
Classification
;
Congenital Abnormalities*
;
Decision Making*
;
Humans
;
Scoliosis
;
Spinal Fusion
;
Surgeons
6.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):40-47
Objective:
This study aims to assess global trends in the use of open surgery versus minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for the treatment of single-level L4–5 degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS).
Methods:
A cross-sectional online survey issued by the AO Spine Knowledge Forum Degenerative was conducted among AO Spine members between July and September 2023. Participants were presented with 3 clinical cases of L4–5 grade 1 DLS, each with varying degrees of stenosis and instability. The survey captured surgeon demographics and preferences for open versus MIS approaches. Statistical analysis, including chi-square tests and logistic regression, was performed to explore associations between surgical choices and surgeon demographics.
Results:
A total of 943 surgeons responded, with 479 completing the survey. Open surgery was the preferred approach in all 3 cases (58.8%, 57.3%, and 42.4%, respectively), particularly in cases involving central and bilateral foraminal stenosis. MIS was the second most common choice, particularly for unilateral foraminal stenosis with mild instability (38.8%). Surgeons’ preferences varied significantly by region, age, and fellowship training, with younger and fellowship-trained surgeons more likely to prefer MIS.
Conclusion
The study highlights the continued predominance of open surgery for DLS, especially in complex cases, despite the growing acceptance of MIS. Significant regional and demographic variations in surgical preferences suggest the need for tailored guidelines and standardized training protocols to optimize patient outcomes. Future research should focus on the long-term efficacy of these approaches and the impact of evolving technologies on surgical decision-making.
7.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):40-47
Objective:
This study aims to assess global trends in the use of open surgery versus minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for the treatment of single-level L4–5 degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS).
Methods:
A cross-sectional online survey issued by the AO Spine Knowledge Forum Degenerative was conducted among AO Spine members between July and September 2023. Participants were presented with 3 clinical cases of L4–5 grade 1 DLS, each with varying degrees of stenosis and instability. The survey captured surgeon demographics and preferences for open versus MIS approaches. Statistical analysis, including chi-square tests and logistic regression, was performed to explore associations between surgical choices and surgeon demographics.
Results:
A total of 943 surgeons responded, with 479 completing the survey. Open surgery was the preferred approach in all 3 cases (58.8%, 57.3%, and 42.4%, respectively), particularly in cases involving central and bilateral foraminal stenosis. MIS was the second most common choice, particularly for unilateral foraminal stenosis with mild instability (38.8%). Surgeons’ preferences varied significantly by region, age, and fellowship training, with younger and fellowship-trained surgeons more likely to prefer MIS.
Conclusion
The study highlights the continued predominance of open surgery for DLS, especially in complex cases, despite the growing acceptance of MIS. Significant regional and demographic variations in surgical preferences suggest the need for tailored guidelines and standardized training protocols to optimize patient outcomes. Future research should focus on the long-term efficacy of these approaches and the impact of evolving technologies on surgical decision-making.
8.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):40-47
Objective:
This study aims to assess global trends in the use of open surgery versus minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for the treatment of single-level L4–5 degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS).
Methods:
A cross-sectional online survey issued by the AO Spine Knowledge Forum Degenerative was conducted among AO Spine members between July and September 2023. Participants were presented with 3 clinical cases of L4–5 grade 1 DLS, each with varying degrees of stenosis and instability. The survey captured surgeon demographics and preferences for open versus MIS approaches. Statistical analysis, including chi-square tests and logistic regression, was performed to explore associations between surgical choices and surgeon demographics.
Results:
A total of 943 surgeons responded, with 479 completing the survey. Open surgery was the preferred approach in all 3 cases (58.8%, 57.3%, and 42.4%, respectively), particularly in cases involving central and bilateral foraminal stenosis. MIS was the second most common choice, particularly for unilateral foraminal stenosis with mild instability (38.8%). Surgeons’ preferences varied significantly by region, age, and fellowship training, with younger and fellowship-trained surgeons more likely to prefer MIS.
Conclusion
The study highlights the continued predominance of open surgery for DLS, especially in complex cases, despite the growing acceptance of MIS. Significant regional and demographic variations in surgical preferences suggest the need for tailored guidelines and standardized training protocols to optimize patient outcomes. Future research should focus on the long-term efficacy of these approaches and the impact of evolving technologies on surgical decision-making.
9.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):40-47
Objective:
This study aims to assess global trends in the use of open surgery versus minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for the treatment of single-level L4–5 degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS).
Methods:
A cross-sectional online survey issued by the AO Spine Knowledge Forum Degenerative was conducted among AO Spine members between July and September 2023. Participants were presented with 3 clinical cases of L4–5 grade 1 DLS, each with varying degrees of stenosis and instability. The survey captured surgeon demographics and preferences for open versus MIS approaches. Statistical analysis, including chi-square tests and logistic regression, was performed to explore associations between surgical choices and surgeon demographics.
Results:
A total of 943 surgeons responded, with 479 completing the survey. Open surgery was the preferred approach in all 3 cases (58.8%, 57.3%, and 42.4%, respectively), particularly in cases involving central and bilateral foraminal stenosis. MIS was the second most common choice, particularly for unilateral foraminal stenosis with mild instability (38.8%). Surgeons’ preferences varied significantly by region, age, and fellowship training, with younger and fellowship-trained surgeons more likely to prefer MIS.
Conclusion
The study highlights the continued predominance of open surgery for DLS, especially in complex cases, despite the growing acceptance of MIS. Significant regional and demographic variations in surgical preferences suggest the need for tailored guidelines and standardized training protocols to optimize patient outcomes. Future research should focus on the long-term efficacy of these approaches and the impact of evolving technologies on surgical decision-making.
10.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):40-47
Objective:
This study aims to assess global trends in the use of open surgery versus minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for the treatment of single-level L4–5 degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS).
Methods:
A cross-sectional online survey issued by the AO Spine Knowledge Forum Degenerative was conducted among AO Spine members between July and September 2023. Participants were presented with 3 clinical cases of L4–5 grade 1 DLS, each with varying degrees of stenosis and instability. The survey captured surgeon demographics and preferences for open versus MIS approaches. Statistical analysis, including chi-square tests and logistic regression, was performed to explore associations between surgical choices and surgeon demographics.
Results:
A total of 943 surgeons responded, with 479 completing the survey. Open surgery was the preferred approach in all 3 cases (58.8%, 57.3%, and 42.4%, respectively), particularly in cases involving central and bilateral foraminal stenosis. MIS was the second most common choice, particularly for unilateral foraminal stenosis with mild instability (38.8%). Surgeons’ preferences varied significantly by region, age, and fellowship training, with younger and fellowship-trained surgeons more likely to prefer MIS.
Conclusion
The study highlights the continued predominance of open surgery for DLS, especially in complex cases, despite the growing acceptance of MIS. Significant regional and demographic variations in surgical preferences suggest the need for tailored guidelines and standardized training protocols to optimize patient outcomes. Future research should focus on the long-term efficacy of these approaches and the impact of evolving technologies on surgical decision-making.