98%
921
2 minutes
20
Background: The microsurgical anterior approach to the cervical spine is commonplace. Fewer surgeons perform posterior cervical microsurgical procedures on a routine basis for lack of indication, more bleeding, persistent postoperative neck pain, and risk of progressive misalignment. In comparison, the endoscopic technique is preferentially performed through the posterior approach. Many spine surgeons and even surgeons versed in lumbar endoscopy are often reluctant to consider endoscopic procedures in the cervical spine. We report the results of a surgeon survey to find out why.
Methods: A questionnaire of 10 questions was sent to spine surgeons by email and chat groups in social media networks including Facebook, WeChat, WhatsApp, and LinkedIn to collect practice pattern data about microscopic and endoscopic spine surgery in the lumbar and cervical spine. The responses were cross-tabulated by surgeons' demographic data. Pearson Chi-Square measures, Kappa statistics, and linear regression analysis of agreement or disagreement were performed by analyzing the distribution of variances using the statistical package SPSS Version 27.0.
Results: The survey response rate was 39.7%, with 50 of the 126 surgeons who started the survey submitting a completed questionnaire. Of the 50 surgeons, 56.2% were orthopedic, and 42% neurological surgeons. Most surgeons worked in private practice (42%). Another 26% were university-employed, 18% were in private practice affiliated with a university, and the remaining 14% were hospital employed. The majority of surgeons (55.1%) were autodidacts. The largest responding surgeon groups were between 35-44 years (38%) and between 45-54 years of age (34%). Half of the responding surgeons were routinely performing endoscopic cervical spine surgery. The other half did not perform it for the main hurdle of fear of complications (50%). Lack of appropriate mentorship was listed as second most reason (25.4%). More concerns for not performing cervical endoscopic approaches were the perception of lack of technology (20.8%) and suitable surgical indication (12.5%). Only 4.2% considered cervical endoscopy too risky. Nearly a third (30.6%) of the spine surgeons treated over 80% of their cervical spine patients with endoscopic surgeries. Most commonly performed were posterior endoscopic cervical discectomy (PECD; 52%), posterior endoscopic cervical foraminotomy (PECF; 48%), anterior endoscopic cervical discectomy (AECD; 32%), cervical endoscopic unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression (CE-ULBD; 30%), respectively.
Conclusion: Cervical endoscopic spine surgery is gaining traction among spine surgeons. However, by far most surgeons performing cervical endoscopic spine surgery work in private practice and are autodidacts. This lack of a teacher to shorten the learning curve as well as fear of complications are two of the major impediments to the successful implementation of cervical endoscopic procedures.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00586-023-07675-8 | DOI Listing |
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg
September 2025
Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia, USA.
Socioeconomic and neighborhood disadvantages have been increasingly investigated for their associations with outcomes in a variety of otolaryngologic conditions. The aim of this study is to explore the role of area deprivation index (ADI) on the hospital length of stay and 30-day readmission following endoscopic endonasal skull base surgery (EESBS). We performed a cross-sectional study of all patients who underwent EESBS between August 2020 and April 2024 at an academic institution.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFJ Obstet Gynaecol Res
September 2025
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kawasaki Medical School, Okayama, Japan.
Aim: This study aimed to compare short- and long-term surgical outcomes between robotic sacrocolpopexy (RSC) and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LSC), performed with concomitant total hysterectomy, in patients with symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse (POP).
Methods: This retrospective cohort study included 167 women who underwent RSC (n = 113) or LSC (n = 54) with hysterectomy for uterine prolapse at Kawasaki Medical University between March 2020 and December 2024. Perioperative parameters, complications (Clavien-Dindo classification), and POP recurrence were assessed.
Dis Esophagus
October 2025
Department of Surgery, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Clinical practice guidelines for esophagogastric junction cancer (EGJ GLs) were published in 2023. In order to evaluate how EGJ GLs have been adopted into clinical practice worldwide and to identify any outstanding clinical questions to be addressed in the next edition, this survey was conducted. An electronic questionnaire was developed.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFPLoS One
September 2025
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Cervical cancer remains the leading cause of cancer death among women in sub-Saharan Africa and is more severe in high HIV-burdened countries due to persistent high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV). In 2021, the World Health Organization recommended primary hrHPV testing for cervical cancer screening; however, optimal triage strategies following positive hrHPV tests remain unclear. We conducted a prospective cost analysis of triage methods for positive hrHPV results among women living with and without HIV in Gaborone, Botswana.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFInt Forum Allergy Rhinol
September 2025
Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Al-Jahra Hospital, Al-Jahra, Kuwait.
Background: Various interventions have been proposed to enhance surgical field quality during endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS). This study evaluates whether preoperative oral clonidine enhances surgical field quality during ESS.
Methods: PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, and CENTRAL databases were searched.