The growth of minimally invasive techniques in spine surgery has accelerated in recent years, leading to development of new techniques and technology such as robotic-assisted spine surgery and full-endoscopic surgery. While robotic spine surgery offers the potential of increased precision and accuracy in instrumentation, endoscopic techniques are beneficial in reducing collateral tissue damage and allowing patients a faster return to function. We describe a case where we combine a robotic guidance system with a full-endoscopic technique, the trans-superior articular process decompression. We aim to share our experience as well as an overview of the surgical technique.

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.

The growth of minimally invasive techniques in spine surgery has accelerated in recent years, leading to development of new techniques and technology such as robotic-assisted spine surgery and full-endoscopic surgery. While robotic spine surgery offers the potential of increased precision and accuracy in instrumentation, endoscopic techniques are beneficial in reducing collateral tissue damage and allowing patients a faster return to function. We describe a case where we combine a robotic guidance system with a full-endoscopic technique, the trans-superior articular process decompression. We aim to share our experience as well as an overview of the surgical technique.

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.

The growth of minimally invasive techniques in spine surgery has accelerated in recent years, leading to development of new techniques and technology such as robotic-assisted spine surgery and full-endoscopic surgery. While robotic spine surgery offers the potential of increased precision and accuracy in instrumentation, endoscopic techniques are beneficial in reducing collateral tissue damage and allowing patients a faster return to function. We describe a case where we combine a robotic guidance system with a full-endoscopic technique, the trans-superior articular process decompression. We aim to share our experience as well as an overview of the surgical technique.

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.

Background: Recurrent gynecological clear cell carcinoma (rGCCC) has a low objective response rate (ORR) to chemotherapy. Previous preclinical and clinical data suggest a potential synergy between immune checkpoint inhibitors and bevacizumab in rGCCC.Dostarlimab, a humanized monoclonal antibody targeting programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1), combined with the anti-angiogenic bevacizumab, presents a novel therapeutic approach. This study will investigate the efficacy of dostarlimab +/− bevacizumab in rGCCC. Methods DOVE is a global, multicenter, international, open-label, randomized phase 2 study of dostarlimab +/− bevacizumab with standard chemotherapy in rGCCC. We will enroll 198 patients with rGCCC and assign them to one of three groups in a 1:1:1 ratio: arm A (dostarlimab monotherapy), B (dostarlimab + bevacizumab), and C (investigator’s choice of chemotherapy [weekly paclitaxel, pegylated liposomal doxorubicin, doxorubicin, or gemcitabine]). Patients with disease progression in arm A or C will be allowed to cross over to arm B. Stratification factors include prior bevacizumab use, prior lines of therapy (1 vs. >1), and primary site (ovarian vs. non-ovarian). Key inclusion criteria are histologically proven recurrent or persistent clear cell carcinoma of the ovary, endometrium, cervix, vagina, or vulva; up to five prior lines of therapy; disease progression within 12 months after platinumbased chemotherapy; and measurable disease. Key exclusion criteria are prior treatment with an anti–PD-1, anti–programmed death-ligand 1, or anti–programmed death-ligand 2 agent.The primary endpoint is progression-free survival determined by investigators. Secondary endpoints are ORR, disease control rate, clinical benefit rate, progression-free survival 2, overall survival, and toxicity. Exploratory objectives include immune biomarkers.

Background: Recurrent gynecological clear cell carcinoma (rGCCC) has a low objective response rate (ORR) to chemotherapy. Previous preclinical and clinical data suggest a potential synergy between immune checkpoint inhibitors and bevacizumab in rGCCC.Dostarlimab, a humanized monoclonal antibody targeting programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1), combined with the anti-angiogenic bevacizumab, presents a novel therapeutic approach. This study will investigate the efficacy of dostarlimab +/− bevacizumab in rGCCC. Methods DOVE is a global, multicenter, international, open-label, randomized phase 2 study of dostarlimab +/− bevacizumab with standard chemotherapy in rGCCC. We will enroll 198 patients with rGCCC and assign them to one of three groups in a 1:1:1 ratio: arm A (dostarlimab monotherapy), B (dostarlimab + bevacizumab), and C (investigator’s choice of chemotherapy [weekly paclitaxel, pegylated liposomal doxorubicin, doxorubicin, or gemcitabine]). Patients with disease progression in arm A or C will be allowed to cross over to arm B. Stratification factors include prior bevacizumab use, prior lines of therapy (1 vs. >1), and primary site (ovarian vs. non-ovarian). Key inclusion criteria are histologically proven recurrent or persistent clear cell carcinoma of the ovary, endometrium, cervix, vagina, or vulva; up to five prior lines of therapy; disease progression within 12 months after platinumbased chemotherapy; and measurable disease. Key exclusion criteria are prior treatment with an anti–PD-1, anti–programmed death-ligand 1, or anti–programmed death-ligand 2 agent.The primary endpoint is progression-free survival determined by investigators. Secondary endpoints are ORR, disease control rate, clinical benefit rate, progression-free survival 2, overall survival, and toxicity. Exploratory objectives include immune biomarkers.

The growth of minimally invasive techniques in spine surgery has accelerated in recent years, leading to development of new techniques and technology such as robotic-assisted spine surgery and full-endoscopic surgery. While robotic spine surgery offers the potential of increased precision and accuracy in instrumentation, endoscopic techniques are beneficial in reducing collateral tissue damage and allowing patients a faster return to function. We describe a case where we combine a robotic guidance system with a full-endoscopic technique, the trans-superior articular process decompression. We aim to share our experience as well as an overview of the surgical technique.

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.