ReviewJournal of spine surgery (Hong Kong)2026
Augmented reality in non-instrumentation minimally invasive spine surgery: a narrative review and future perspectives.
Review in Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Objective: Augmented reality (AR) is being increasingly integrated into spine surgery. However, most existing reviews predominantly focus on its use in instrumentation-based procedures. The broader role of AR in of non-instrumentation minimally invasive spine surgery (MISS), including decompression, endoscopic, and tubular techniques, has not been fully synthesized. This narrative review aims to bring together the current evidence on AR applications across the full range of MISS, with a particular focus on visualization- and workflow-critical non-instrumentation procedures, an area that has been underrepresented in prior reviews. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for articles published between 2010 and 2025. Search terms included Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) and free-text keywords related to augmented reality, minimally invasive spine surgery, decompression, and navigation. Only peer-reviewed English-language articles were included. Study selection was performed independently by three reviewers, with discrepancies resolved by consensus. Key Content and Findings: The review synthesizes AR applications across percutaneous procedures, tubular surgery, endoscopic spine surgery (ESS), microscopic surgery, and lateral approaches. The literature indicates that AR can enhance intraoperative visualization through Conclusions: AR represents a promising adjunct in MISS, particularly for non-instrumentation procedures in which visualization is limited. To define its definitive clinical value, future research must prioritize workflow standardization, validation of performance metrics, and adequately powered multicenter trials that assess clinically meaningful outcomes. Integration with artificial intelligence (AI) and robotic platforms may further enhance surgical precision and efficiency, shaping the next phase of MISS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.