Learns more about the ioverame dials branch treatments

Regenerative and Wellness Medicine: A Boon or Barrier to Surgical Innovation in Degenerative Spine Care?

  • International Journal of Spine Surgery
  • December 2025,
  • 8837;
  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.14444/8837

Abstract

Background Regenerative and wellness medicine is rapidly reshaping health care, particularly in the management of degenerative spine conditions. Noninvasive or minimally invasive options such as stem cell therapy, platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections, and holistic wellness programs are increasingly selected by patients who wish to avoid the risks, costs, and prolonged recovery associated with elective spine surgery.

Purpose This perspective article examines whether regenerative and wellness approaches function primarily as a boon or a barrier to innovation in spine surgery and explores their impact on traditional, insurance-based surgical care models.

Methods Using a narrative, opinion-based framework, this article synthesizes current trends in regenerative and wellness treatments, their economic growth relative to conventional spine care, and their penetration into nonsurgical spine markets. It further considers how these trends intersect with policy, reimbursement, and professional society initiatives.

Results The rapid expansion of regenerative and wellness interventions has created a powerful economic sector that, in some areas of nonsurgical spine care, is projected to surpass traditional medicine. Many of these therapies lack robust clinical evidence, yet the absence of data does not equate to inefficacy. These resulting strategic challenges will likely have a greater effect on spine surgeons who aredependent primarily on insurance-based reimbursement. At the same time, integrating validated regenerative options can broaden the surgical practice portfolio and better match patient preferences for personalized, minimally invasive care. Policy changes expanding coverage for evidence-based regenerative treatments may further accelerate this shift.

Conclusions To remain relevant in an increasingly patient-driven health care environment, spine surgeons and organizations such as the International Society for the Advancement of Spine Surgery must proactively adapt to the growth of regenerative and wellness medicine. Failure to engage may relegate spine surgery largely to trauma, tumor, and infection, while regenerative and wellness strategies could dominate the management of painful degenerative spine disorders.

Clinical Relevance Regenerative and wellness medicine is rapidly reshaping how patients with degenerative spine conditions seek care, forcing spine surgeons to decide whether to integrate these modalities or risk losing a growing segment of nonsurgical spine patients.

Level of Evidence 5.

Introduction

Regenerative and wellness medicine has emerged as a transformative approach in modern health care, focusing on holistic treatment options, enhancing the body’s natural healing abilities, and promoting overall well-being.1 Unlike traditional medical interventions, which often prioritize treating symptoms or employing surgical solutions, regenerative and wellness medicine aims to restore function, slow down degeneration, and improve quality of life using innovative techniques such as cell-based therapies, lifestyle modifications, and personalized care.2 This paradigm shift represents a significant evolution in how patients and healthcare providers approach conditions, particularly those involving the spine.3,4

Regenerative medicine is a branch of medical science focused on repairing, replacing, or regenerating damaged or diseased cells, tissues, or organs. It often employs techniques like stem cell therapy, tissue engineering, and gene therapy to restore normal function.5 The goal of regenerative medicine is to stimulate the body’s own repair mechanisms to heal previously irreparable tissues or organs, providing new therapeutic options for conditions such as degenerative diseases, trauma, and congenital disorders, including treatments for spinal cord injuries, heart disease, and diabetes.6 Wellness medicine, on the other hand, refers to a holistic approach to health care that emphasizes the prevention of disease and the maintenance of overall well-being.7 It focuses on optimizing health through lifestyle modifications such as nutrition, exercise, stress management, and mental health. Wellness medicine seeks to promote balance and enhance the body’s natural ability to maintain health, often incorporating practices from complementary and alternative medicine alongside conventional treatments.8 It aims to enhance quality of life and prevent illnesses by addressing physical, emotional, and social factors. In essence, regenerative medicine focuses on restoring damaged biological systems, while wellness medicine emphasizes maintaining and optimizing health to prevent disease.

In recent years, there has been a noticeable change in patient preferences, with a growing number of individuals seeking noninvasive treatments and wellness-based approaches for spine care.9 Patients increasingly desire solutions that reduce the need for surgical intervention, minimize recovery time, and focus on long-term health benefits rather than short-term fixes. This shift has been fueled by advancements in regenerative therapies, increased access to information, and a deeper awareness of the benefits of maintaining overall wellness.10 As a result, patients are opting for treatments that align with their goals of achieving sustainable health and avoiding the risks associated with traditional surgical procedures.

The regenerative and wellness industry has not only gained popularity but has also become a major economic force in health care. It now surpasses traditional medicine in terms of dollars spent, particularly in nonsurgical spine care.11 As patients and providers shift to alternative solutions such as stem cell therapies,12 platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections,13 personalized physical rehabilitation,14 and integrative lifestyle changes, the financial impact is evident. The industry’s growth reflects a broader trend of moving away from purely reactive medical treatments toward a proactive, preventive approach that emphasizes healing from within.15,16 This perspective article explores the implications of this shift, assessing how the rise of regenerative and wellness medicine may be impacting the surgical care of painful degenerative conditions of the spine and its impact on traditional surgical practices.

Spinal Disease Burden

Low back pain was highlighted as one of the most prevalent types of pain in health care based on data from the 2021 Global Burden of Disease Study.17 In 2023, researchers estimated the global prevalence of low back pain between 1990 and 2020 across 204 countries and territories.18 In 2020 alone, 619 million people were affected, with projections suggesting that this number could rise to 843 million by 2050, a 36.4% increase. The global age-standardized rate of years lived with disability (YLDs) in 2020 was 832 per 100,000 people, with rates ranging from 578 to 1070. Between 1990 and 2020, age-standardized rates for both prevalence and YLDs fell by 10.4% and 10.5%, respectively.18 Occupational factors, smoking, and high body mass index accounted for 38.8% of the YLDs related to low back pain.18 The largest increases in prevalence are expected in Asia and Africa, primarily due to population growth, while in regions like East Asia, South Asia, Latin America, and the Caribbean, aging populations are the key driver. These projections underscore the need for targeted clinical guidelines for managing low back pain, particularly in elderly populations, where prevalence peaks at age 85 years.18

Globally, low back pain was responsible for 69 million YLDs in 2020, making it the leading cause of years lived in poor health.18 Risk factors, including smoking, obesity, and occupational ergonomic issues like repetitive movements and heavy lifting, contribute to nearly 40% of the associated YLDs. Prevalence varies across regions, with Hungary and the Czech Republic having the highest rates and Myanmar and the Maldives the lowest. Women exhibited higher prevalence rates than men, particularly in older age groups, with the highest YLD rates globally found in the 80 to 84 age range.18 Population growth and aging are key factors influencing the rankings of different countries in the study. Women exhibited higher global prevalence rates than men across all age groups, with more pronounced differences observed in older age groups, particularly among those older than 75 years (Figure 1). The global age-standardized prevalence rate per 100,000 was also higher in women (9330; 95% uncertainty interval 8370–10,500) than in men (5520; 4930–6190). Prevalence and YLDs increased with age, reaching peak rates around 85 years. Among all age groups, the age 80 to 84 years group had the highest YLD rate per 100,000 globally (2440; 1470–3490).18

Figure 1

Global prevalence of low back pain by age and sex in 2020. Shaded areas represent 95% uncertainty intervals. Source: Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation. Used with permission. All rights reserved.

The Life and Health Span Dynamic

Throughout human history, the pursuit of extended youth and vitality has been a consistent aspiration, driven by the desire for a longer and healthier life.19 In the modern era, remarkable advancements in medical science and the rapid expansion of the rejuvenation industry have brought this once-distant dream closer to reality. The extraordinary progress made over the past 150 years is evident in the significant increase in global life expectancy, which has risen from a mere 30 years in 1870 to 73.2 years today (Figure 2).20 However, this remarkable achievement has also highlighted the gap between lifespan and healthspan, which stands at approximately 9.2 years.21 This discrepancy raises important considerations for the management of degenerative conditions such as low back pain, particularly in the context of aging populations.22

Figure 2

Illustration of the healthspan to lifespan gap of 9.2 years.21

As life expectancy increases, it becomes crucial to develop a deeper understanding of the aging process and its broader economic implications. With an aging population, there is a need to address the challenges posed by conditions such as low back pain, which have substantial impacts on economic factors, including workforce participation, retirement planning, and health care utilization. The strain of managing low back pain throughout a prolonged lifespan necessitates strategies that ensure economic stability while addressing the unique health care needs of this demographic.23 Additionally, the increase in life expectancy brings to the forefront the importance of lifestyle adjustments to maintain a high quality of life despite the burdens of aging and degenerative spine diseases, such as low back pain and neurogenic claudication. From a practical standpoint, individuals are required to reassess their behaviors and health management strategies as they navigate the opportunities and challenges of living longer, healthier lives. Key considerations include financial planning, career adjustments, and health care utilization, all within the context of preserving overall well-being.19

Achieving healthy longevity involves empowering individuals to live longer lives while maintaining optimal physical, mental, and emotional well-being. This requires proactive, sustainable choices that positively affect long-term health outcomes. Adopting a healthy lifestyle, including regular physical activity, balanced nutrition, sufficient sleep, effective stress management, and strong social connections, is fundamental in promoting healthy aging and maintaining a high quality of life.19 These lifestyle factors are essential pillars in the pursuit of healthy longevity, providing a solid foundation for individuals to age gracefully while enjoying improved well-being.24 For patients older than 50 years, low back pain remains a significant concern. Many patients, particularly those seeking well-aging strategies, are not well served by existing public health care spine care models, where decisions for surgery or interventions are often based solely on imaging. Frustrated by limited options, these patients frequently turn to private practitioners for more personalized solutions. This highlights the need for a more structured care model tailored to these highly functional individuals—a model that not only emphasizes the benefits of a healthy lifestyle but also recognizes the importance of offering treatments that align with the patient’s personal goals and functional status. This approach is especially important as evidence continues to support the idea that regular physical activity and healthy lifestyle choices are linked to reduced risks of chronic conditions such as cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and cancer.19

Overview of the Wellness and Regenerative Medicine Industry

Definition and Scope of Wellness and Regenerative Medicine

The wellness and regenerative medicine industry encompasses a broad range of health care practices aimed at promoting overall health, preventing illness, and enhancing the body’s natural ability to heal and regenerate.25 Unlike conventional medicine, which often focuses on treating specific diseases or managing symptoms, wellness medicine emphasizes a holistic approach to health that includes lifestyle modifications, nutrition, exercise, stress management, and preventive care.26

Wellness medicine aims to empower individuals to take proactive control over their health by adopting healthy behaviors that support physical, mental, and emotional well-being. Key components of wellness medicine include:

  • Lifestyle modifications: Encouraging positive changes in daily habits that improve long-term health outcomes, such as regular exercise, sufficient sleep, and stress reduction techniques.

  • Nutrition: Focusing on balanced diets, nutrient-rich foods, and personalized dietary plans to prevent chronic illnesses and support overall health.

  • Exercise: Promoting physical activity as a fundamental aspect of maintaining cardiovascular health, muscle strength, flexibility, and mental wellness.

  • Stress management: Implementing techniques such as mindfulness, meditation, and relaxation exercises to reduce the impact of stress on both physical and mental health.

  • Preventive care: Proactive measures to prevent the onset of diseases, including regular health screenings, vaccinations, and risk assessments.

Regenerative medicine, on the other hand, leverages advanced medical technologies to restore or replace damaged cells, tissues, or organs to help the body recover its natural function (Figure 3).6 This approach is at the cutting edge of medical innovation, employing techniques that go beyond symptom management to address the root cause of health issues. Key areas of regenerative medicine include:

  • Stem cell therapy: Utilizing stem cells to repair or regenerate damaged tissues, particularly in musculoskeletal and spinal conditions.

  • PRP therapy: Using a concentration of a patient’s own platelets to accelerate the healing of injured tendons, ligaments, muscles, and joints.

  • Gene therapy: Modifying or manipulating genes within an individual’s cells to treat or prevent diseases, with emerging applications in regenerative care.

  • Tissue engineering: Developing bioengineered tissues that can be used to replace or support damaged body parts, promising advancements in spinal disc regeneration and other orthopedic treatments.

Figure 3

Graphic illustration of the 4 disease groups—osteoporosis,27 osteoarthritis,28 degenerative disc disease,29 and sarcopenia30—that significantly contribute to the disease burden in the elderly and are most responsive to cell-based antiaging treatments.

Together, wellness and regenerative medicine represent a comprehensive approach to health care that focuses on optimizing health, preventing degeneration, and utilizing the body’s natural healing capabilities.

Economic Size of the Wellness and Regenerative Medicine Industry

The wellness and regenerative medicine industry has grown into a substantial economic force, with a global market value that continues to expand rapidly. According to recent statistics, the wellness industry alone is projected to reach nearly $7 trillion by 2025, driven by a postpandemic surge in demand for health and wellness products and services.31,32 This industry has been growing at an average annual rate of 9.9%, significantly outpacing the growth rate of traditional medical care sectors (Figure 4). The wellness industry comprises various sectors that contribute to its overall market strength, including:

  • Personal care and beauty: Valued at nearly $1 trillion, this sector focuses on products and services aimed at enhancing appearance and promoting self-care.

  • Healthy eating, nutrition, and weight loss: Generating close to $1 trillion, this area emphasizes dietary improvements, nutritional supplements, and weight management solutions.

  • Physical activity: Worth over $700 billion, this sector includes fitness services, equipment, and recreational activities aimed at promoting an active lifestyle.

  • Mental wellness: A rapidly growing segment valued at over $130 billion, focused on therapies, mental health apps, and practices that enhance psychological well-being.

  • Preventive and personalized medicine: Valued at approximately $375 billion, this sector emphasizes individualized health care approaches and proactive strategies to maintain health and prevent disease.

Figure 4

 Graphic illustration of the global wellness economy. Data sourced from the Global Wellness Institute.33

In comparison to traditional health care, the spending on wellness and regenerative approaches has surpassed expenditures on conventional medical treatments, especially when it comes to nonsurgical spine care.34 Patients are increasingly investing in alternative therapies like stem cell treatments,12 PRP injections,13 and holistic wellness programs10 that are not typically covered by insurance but offer the promise of pain relief and improved quality of life without surgery. This trend underscores the significant shift in consumer preferences toward wellness-focused and regenerative solutions over traditional, often invasive medical interventions. The growing economic impact of the wellness and regenerative industry highlights its potential to redefine health care by prioritizing preventive care, patient empowerment, and innovative treatment modalities. As this market continues to expand, it represents not just a complement to traditional medicine but a transformative force that is reshaping how individuals manage their health and well-being, particularly in the context of degenerative spine care.

Spending Patterns in Nonsurgical Spine Care vs Surgical Spine Care

Nonsurgical Spine Care as a Major Market Segment

Nonsurgical spine care has emerged as a significant segment within the broader market of spine treatment, offering a variety of therapeutic options aimed at pain relief, improved mobility, and overall wellness without the need for invasive procedures. This segment includes a diverse range of treatments that cater to patients looking for alternatives to surgery to relieve pain. Chiropractic care plays a key role in this approach by focusing on spinal adjustments and manipulations that aim to alleviate pain, improve alignment, and enhance the body’s natural healing processes.35 Physical therapy with personal trainers is another cornerstone of nonsurgical spine care, involving targeted exercises and manual therapies.36 Acupuncture, a traditional Chinese medicine technique, is also widely used in nonsurgical spine care.37 Regenerative injections, such as stem cell therapy and PRP injections,13 are gaining popularity for their potential to repair damaged tissues and reduce inflammation in spinal structures, offering a biological approach to managing spinal conditions. Complementing these methods are wellness-focused therapies, which integrate holistic practices like yoga,38 meditation,39 nutrition counseling,40 and stress management techniques.41,42 These therapies aim to promote not only spinal health but also overall well-being, encouraging a balanced approach to long-term health and vitality.

These nonsurgical treatments are gaining popularity among patients because of their lower risks, minimal recovery times, and the potential for long-term benefits compared with surgical interventions. However, a significant portion of these therapies lacks sufficient evidence and is often not covered by insurance, resulting in substantial out-of-pocket expenses for patients.43 However, patients are increasingly willing to invest their own money in nonsurgical spine care options as they seek personalized treatment plans that address their unique needs without the complications associated with surgery. This shift in preference highlights the growing demand for alternative approaches that prioritize regenerative and wellness solutions over traditional surgical methods.

Commercialization

When comparing spending patterns between nonsurgical and surgical spine care, it is evident that nonsurgical treatments represent a considerable portion of the total dollars spent in the spine care industry.44 Data show that patient spending on nonsurgical treatments, such as regenerative injections and wellness therapies, is on par with payments made for surgical procedures,44 particularly in cases where insurance coverage is limited or unavailable, underscoring a significant gap in traditional insurance models. This trend reflects a broader movement toward patient-centered care, where individuals are empowered to take an active role in their treatment decisions. The preference for nonsurgical, wellness-focused options highlights the industry’s response to the need for less invasive, more natural interventions that align with patients’ lifestyle goals and expectations. The increased spending in the nonsurgical segment now surpassing that in surgical spine care indicates a major shift in how patients approach spine health management, particularly for low back pain.45

The Global Wellness Institute has projected strong future growth for the wellness economy, with a predicted postpandemic resurgence leading to an average annual growth rate of 9.9%. By 2025, the wellness economy is expected to reach nearly $7.0 trillion, underscoring its increasing importance in the global market.33 In 2020, the wellness economy accounted for 5.1% of global economic output, highlighting its significant presence and growing influence. This sector is composed of 11 distinct areas, each contributing to the overall wellness economy (Figure 4).

  1. Personal care and beauty: Valued at $955 billion, this sector focuses on products and services related to personal grooming and appearance enhancement.

  2. Healthy eating, nutrition, and weight loss: With a value of $946 billion, this sector emphasizes promoting healthy dietary practices, nutrition education, and weight management.

  3. Physical activity: Valued at $738 billion, this sector encompasses various forms of physical exercise, sports, and recreational activities.

  4. Wellness tourism: With a value of $436 billion, wellness tourism involves travel experiences and destinations prioritizing health, relaxation, and well-being.

  5. Traditional and complementary medicine: This sector, valued at $413 billion, includes practices and therapies beyond conventional medicine, such as herbal remedies, acupuncture, and Ayurveda.

  6. Public health, prevention, and personalized medicine: With a value of $375 billion, this sector promotes public health initiatives, disease prevention, and tailored medical approaches.

  7. Wellness real estate: Valued at $275 billion, this sector pertains to the development and design of living spaces that prioritize wellness, incorporating features like green buildings, access to nature, and community health amenities.

  8. Mental wellness: With a value of $131 billion, this sector addresses mental health and well-being, encompassing services, therapies, and initiatives that promote emotional balance and psychological well-being.

  9. Spas: Valued at $68 billion, the spa industry provides a range of relaxation, beauty, and treatments to enhance physical and mental well-being.

  10. Workplace wellness: With a value of $49 billion, workplace wellness programs aim to improve employee health and well-being through various initiatives, including fitness programs, stress management, and health screenings.

  11. Thermal/mineral springs: Valued at $39 billion, this sector focuses on utilizing natural thermal and mineral springs for their therapeutic properties, offering opportunities for relaxation and rejuvenation.

Factors Driving the Growth of the Regenerative and Wellness Spine Care Market

Patient Preferences and Shifting Attitudes

One of the primary drivers behind the growth of regenerative and wellness spine care is the shift in patient preferences toward noninvasive and natural healing methods. Patients are increasingly aware of the benefits of wellness and regenerative treatments, including lower invasiveness, reduced pain, quicker recovery times, and the emphasis on the body’s natural healing processes.46 This growing awareness is shaped by patient education efforts and the widespread marketing of wellness-focused care. As more information becomes available about the potential long-term benefits of these treatments, patients are more likely to opt for wellness and regenerative options, especially when looking for alternatives to surgery. The role of patient education and marketing cannot be overstated in this shift. Health care providers and wellness centers invest heavily in educating patients about the holistic benefits of these approaches. As a result, patient attitudes toward traditional, often invasive, spine surgery have softened in favor of these more conservative treatments, further driving demand for the wellness-focused spine care market (Figure 5).

Figure 5

This figure illustrates the factors driving the growth of the regenerative and wellness spine care market, focusing on the interplay of patient preferences, technological advancements, economic incentives, and investment efforts. The central node represents the expansion of the regenerative and wellness spine care market, influenced by patient preferences shifting toward noninvasive treatments, driven by increased awareness through education and marketing. Technological innovation, such as stem cell therapies, platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections, and minimally invasive techniques, alongside the growing importance of personalized treatment approaches like genetic profiling, also plays a role. Economic factors are also crucial, with higher traditional care costs leading patients to seek more affordable wellness options, fostering the development of cash-based models. These financial models allow for greater flexibility, enabling a wider range of treatments not constrained by insurance coverage, emphasizing patients’ willingness to invest out-of-pocket in long-term, cost-effective wellness solutions. Finally, the role of investment in the industry is highlighted, with biotechnology firms, pharmaceutical companies, and longevity clinics dedicating significant resources to research and development, driving innovation and the transformation of health care through regenerative and wellness approaches.

Role of Technology and Innovation

Technological advancements have played a crucial role in fueling the growth of regenerative and wellness spine care. Breakthroughs in regenerative medicine technologies, such as stem cell therapies12 and PRP injections,13 have seen spinal application with the intent to repair and regenerate spinal tissues. Additionally, innovations in minimally invasive techniques, such as endoscopic spinal procedures, have provided a delivery platform for these targeted regenerative treatments.47 Moreover, genetic profiling may allow stratification of patients into high- vs low-risk groups for surgical treatments and make the case for regenerative and wellness strategies in some but not other patients. This level of personalization and precision is attractive to patients seeking more tailored and less invasive solutions, helping drive the expansion of the regenerative and wellness spine care market.

Economic Factors and Commercialization

Economic factors also significantly contribute to the rise of the regenerative and wellness spine care market. The escalating costs of traditional medical care, including spine surgery, have prompted patients to seek more affordable, wellness-based treatments. These nonsurgical alternatives, although often not covered by insurance, are perceived by many stakeholders as cost-effective solutions in the long run, as they may reduce the need for expensive and invasive procedures while promoting long-term health and mobility. Patients are increasingly willing to pay out-of-pocket for these treatments, recognizing their potential for lasting benefits without the high risks associated with surgery.

For many nonsurgical spine care providers, the economic incentives of regenerative and wellness treatments are evident. These approaches enable the development of cash-based models that operate independently of the limitations imposed by noncoverage or low insurance reimbursements. This flexibility allows these providers to offer a wider range of services—whether fully validated by scientific research or not—that cater to an increasing patient demand for alternative treatments. Hence, they are in direct competition with spine surgeons. Despite the limited research and scientific backing in some areas, the regenerative and wellness spine care market is positioned for continued growth, fueled by patient interest and the financial benefits for providers offering these innovative solutions.

Investors, entrepreneurs, and established companies have increasingly recognized the immense potential of the longevity market, prompting significant investment in research, development, and commercialization of innovative products and services.48 The rapidly growing longevity industry is at the forefront of transforming health care by developing cutting-edge treatments aimed at addressing the challenges of aging and promoting extended, healthier lifespans. This industry spans a variety of sectors, including biotechnology firms, pharmaceutical companies, supplement manufacturers, and longevity clinics, among others.49 The collaborative efforts of these entities are driving breakthroughs that are reshaping the future of health care. In addition, governments and health care systems have begun to recognize the importance of healthy aging initiatives, especially as they aim to mitigate the increasing health care costs associated with age-related conditions. The COVID-19 pandemic underscored the vulnerabilities of older populations, highlighting the need for preventive health measures. As a result, policymakers and health care providers are focusing on strategies that promote proactive approaches to aging and overall well-being. This convergence of investment, entrepreneurial innovation, and governmental support marks a significant shift toward leveraging the potential of healthy aging. By fostering collaboration between the private and public sectors, there is an opportunity for accelerated progress in developing effective interventions, therapies, and preventive strategies that address the complex challenges associated with aging. These efforts hold the promise of not only extending lifespans but ensuring that these additional years are characterized by vitality, health, and well-being.

Impact of Regenerative and Wellness Medicine on Health Care Systems

Influence on Traditional Medical Practices

The rise of the wellness and regenerative industry is fundamentally impacting surgical spine care for painful degenerative conditions, shifting the focus from reactive, symptom-based treatments that are advertised as more proactive, naturally healing, and preventive. Rather than solely addressing painful spine conditions such as neurogenic claudication, radiculopathy, or discogenic or facetogenic pain through surgery or pharmaceutical interventions, there is a growing emphasis on holistic and regenerative techniques that promote natural healing focused on reducing inflammation and pain. The treatments are appealing to patients who prefer to prioritize long-term health management over quick fixes. However, this shift poses challenges to traditional health care models, particularly as increasing numbers of patients opt for out-of-pocket spending on wellness solutions. This trend has the potential to reshape how spine care is delivered, with providers outside of traditional models gaining an edge by meeting the demand for personalized, wellness-oriented care.

Role of Insurance and Health Care Policies

Historically, health insurance companies have provided limited coverage for nonsurgical and regenerative spine treatments, resulting in significant out-of-pocket expenses for patients pursuing these alternative therapies. This coverage gap has contributed to the growth of cash-based models within the wellness and regenerative sectors. As the popularity of these treatments continues to rise, there is increasing discussion around potential policy reforms that could extend insurance coverage to a broader range of regenerative and wellness spine care options. Although only a few regenerative spine procedures are currently covered by some carriers, policy changes are likely since chronic low back pain was recently assigned its own ICD-10 code.50 Alternative treatments with neurostimulation and viable disc allograft supplementation (VIA Disc NP)51 that, in a recent trial, demonstrated a significant reduction in pain and increased function in patients suffering from symptomatic degenerative disc disease are already on the horizon. Market opportunities will likely expand by making these treatments more accessible to a larger patient population, provided that their effectiveness can be substantiated through scientific evidence.

Generating robust evidence to support the effectiveness of regenerative and wellness treatments is crucial to encourage policymakers to consider expanding coverage for these less invasive and more affordable modalities, which may significantly improve pain management and functional outcomes. By maintaining an open and adaptive approach, policymakers can facilitate the integration of these innovative treatments into mainstream spine care, shaping how surgical spine interventions are delivered in the broader context of patient-centered health care. Since many regenerative treatments target the nonsurgical patient population, this shift toward noninvasive solutions would not diminish the role of spine surgery but potentially enhance it by offering patients a more comprehensive care continuum. Spine surgeons, in alignment with this growing demand for minimally invasive solutions, could experience increased referrals and improved patient retention, as patients who initially seek alternative regenerative treatments are likely to return when their conditions progress to a stage requiring surgical intervention. For example, conditions like neurogenic claudication and myelopathy caused by advanced spinal stenosis or spondylolisthesis may eventually require surgical correction after the efficacy of nonsurgical treatments diminishes. By incorporating regenerative approaches into their practice, spine surgeons can ensure that they remain central to the patient’s long-term care journey, providing both nonsurgical alternatives and surgical expertise as the disease progresses. This approach not only enhances patient engagement but also positions spine surgery as an integral component of a holistic, multidisciplinary treatment strategy.

Potential for Harm

Regenerative and wellness medical strategies, although promising, may present significant risks when used for progressive neurological conditions such as cervical spondylotic myelopathy, degenerative conditions of the neuroaxis, tumors, and other malignancies, where surgical intervention remains the primary treatment. These therapies may lead to delays in effective treatment as patients postpone or forgo crucial surgical options that prevent further neurological decline. Such delays can result in irreversible damage and worsening of the condition. Additionally, reliance on unproven regenerative therapies may create a false sense of security, prompting patients to underestimate the severity of their ailments and neglect necessary medical evaluations and interventions. There are inherent risks of adverse effects, including complications like infection, immune reactions, or tumor formation, which can exacerbate existing malignancies or introduce new health concerns. Moreover, the misallocation of resources—both time and financial—toward these therapies can divert attention from evidence-based treatments, potentially resulting in poorer health outcomes. The psychological impact is also noteworthy, as patients may experience increased anxiety and stress when pressured to choose between conventional and alternative therapies. While the exploration of regenerative and wellness strategies is important, it is crucial to carefully consider these potential harms in contrast to the benefits, especially in contexts where prompt and effective surgical intervention is crucial for managing progressive neurological conditions.

Future Trends and Predictions

Expanding Role of Wellness and Regenerative Medicine in Health Care

The influence of wellness and regenerative medicine is anticipated to grow substantially across health care markets, particularly in spine care. As patients increasingly seek noninvasive, preventive, and personalized treatments, these therapies are becoming integral to mainstream health care. Advancements in biotechnology, such as stem cell therapy,12 tissue engineering,52 gene therapy,53 and 3D-printed implants made from novel biomaterials,54 are expected to drive further innovation and enable more effective, less invasive spine treatments. With a focus on natural healing, breakthroughs in regenerative medicine—especially those aimed at mitigating the painful effects of spinal aging—are likely to shift health care toward a preventive model, prioritizing long-term health over reactive interventions.55

The wellness industry, already a multi-trillion-dollar market,11 is set to further expand its influence in spine care. Patients are increasingly choosing wellness solutions because of their perceived lower risks, possible quicker recovery times, and hopeful comprehensive benefits compared with traditional surgical options. Cash-based models are becoming more appealing, allowing patients greater flexibility to negotiate pricing with providers, particularly as the traditional insurance landscape continues to see rising deductibles, co-pays, and limited coverage. As technology advances, wellness and regenerative treatments will become more precise and accessible, offering personalized interventions that cater to each patient’s specific needs. This trend presents a notable challenge to traditional spine surgery, which remains largely dependent on insurance-based care models. The increasing popularity of wellness and regenerative medicine has the potential to significantly reshape the future of spine care, shifting the focus from surgical procedures to these emerging, patient-centered alternatives. Patients desire more control over their treatment options, where they prioritize quality of care, outcomes, and convenience over traditional, insurance-driven models of care. If spine surgeons do not actively embrace this trend and integrate related technologies into their clinical trials and protocol development, spine surgery may be limited primarily to cases of trauma, tumors, and infection.

Advocacy

While many regenerative therapies and wellness interventions are still in the early stages of clinical validation, their growing popularity cannot be ignored. The market for these treatments is expanding rapidly, and patients are increasingly seeking out practitioners who provide these options. For spine surgeons, this presents both a challenge and an opportunity. On the one hand, there is a clear threat to the traditional surgical model, which often depends on insurance-based care and may struggle to compete with cash-based wellness clinics offering personalized, patient-centered care. On the other hand, spine surgeons who integrate regenerative and wellness approaches into their practice have the potential to meet the changing demands of their patients, offering a more comprehensive and less invasive treatment portfolio. Moreover, the success of regenerative treatments in managing spine-related pain may further drive policy changes within the health care system. As demand for these treatments grows, there will likely be increased pressure on insurance companies to expand coverage for nonsurgical, regenerative spine care. Should insurance policies evolve to include more wellness and regenerative treatments, the spine care market will experience further growth, potentially reshaping the role of surgery in treating degenerative spine conditions.

The International Society for the Advancement of Spine Surgery (ISASS) actively supports its members through program development and policy advocacy. The ISASS board member authors of this article aim to refocus the organization on addressing the issues surrounding regenerative and wellness medicine discussed here. Formulating policies for creating educational initiatives and continuing medical education opportunities that incorporate regenerative and wellness therapies is essential. These initiatives will advocate for changes in health care policy and insurance reimbursement models to support the validation of regenerative and wellness treatments in spine care, ensuring safe and effective use of therapies while leveling the playing field between traditional and regenerative approaches. To remain relevant, ISASS will need to foster research collaborations and promote clinical trials to validate the effectiveness and safety of regenerative treatments. By collaborating with academic institutions and industry stakeholders, ISASS members should support the organization’s efforts to generate credible, high-quality clinical data. ISASS has a unique opportunity to lead the future of spine surgery by ensuring surgeons are prepared for evolving patient demands.

Discussion

Spine surgeons are increasingly confronted with the rapid rise of regenerative and wellness medicine. This growing industry, now widely embraced by pain management physicians, chiropractors, anti-aging clinics, and rejuvenation centers, is capturing the attention of patients searching for less invasive alternatives to traditional spine surgery. Many of these patients seek treatments for painful degenerative spine conditions, such as disc degeneration, spinal stenosis, and facet joint pain, and are increasingly drawn to the promise of regenerative therapies that offer natural healing with fewer risks and faster recovery times. Consequently, spine surgeons cannot afford to overlook the influence of regenerative and wellness medicine.

Patients who once may have accepted surgical intervention as their primary option are now exploring alternatives, often driven by a desire to avoid the high costs and risks associated with elective spine surgeries. Nonsurgical interventions, such as stem cell therapy, PRP injections, and other regenerative techniques, are widely marketed as safer, more natural ways to address spine-related pain. At the same time, wellness-focused approaches—including chiropractic care, acupuncture, and lifestyle modifications—are being promoted as preventive measures to support spine health and overall well-being. The rise of these alternatives has led to a significant shift in patient preferences, with many patients choosing to pay out-of-pocket for these treatments, given their limited insurance coverage.

Conclusion

Spine surgeons face a pivotal moment in their practice as the rise of regenerative and wellness medicine continues to reshape the health care landscape. The growing popularity of nonsurgical, minimally invasive treatments is not a passing trend but a reflection of a deeper shift in patient expectations and preferences. Patients are increasingly seeking solutions that offer lower risks, faster recovery times, and holistic benefits. As such, spine surgeons must stay informed and proactive in adapting to these changes. Failure to acknowledge and integrate these evolving treatment modalities could result in a significant shift in the spine care paradigm, where nonsurgical, wellness-based approaches become the standard for managing degenerative spine conditions. The integration of regenerative therapies represents an opportunity for spine surgeons to enhance their practice portfolios. By incorporating these advancements into their practices, spine surgeons can maintain their central role in spine care, providing a continuum of care that spans both surgical and nonsurgical options. Minimally invasive and endoscopic techniques may be useful in this integration of regenerative strategies into traditional spine surgery since they allow for directly visualized targeted procedures. Spine surgeons who resist adapting to these emerging trends risk being left behind in an increasingly competitive health care market. Nonsurgical practitioners, including pain management specialists, chiropractors, and wellness-focused clinics, are rapidly filling the gap for patients who seek alternatives to surgery. If spine surgeons remain solely reliant on traditional surgical interventions, they may find themselves limited to treating only the most severe cases, such as trauma, tumor, or infection. In the broader health care context, ISASS should articulate potential policy changes aiming to provide clinical evidence rooted in clinical investigation to identify those high-value regenerative procedures that should be recommended for insurance coverage. By embracing the advancements in regenerative medicine and wellness care, spine surgeons can continue to lead in providing comprehensive, evidence-based care that meets the needs of today’s informed and empowered patients. Ultimately, the future of spine surgery will depend on how well surgeons adapt to these changes.

Footnotes

  • Funding The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

  • Declaration of Conflicting Interests The authors declare no conflict of interest relevant to this research, and there was no personal circumstance or interest that may be perceived as inappropriately influencing the representation or interpretation of reported findings.

References

  1. 1.
    Chan MK , Nalapko Y , Alvin G , et al . Successful wellness clinic: protocols of regeneration and restoration technologies for the longevity medicine. Handbook on Longevity Medicine: The Road Map. European Wellness Academy; 2024.
  2. 2.
    Kokudal EB . From the State of Degeneration to Regeneration: Improving Health and Wellbeing Within Architectural Implementations . [Master's thesis]. Middle East Technical University; 2022.
  3. 3.
    Desai MJ , Mansfield JT , Robinson DM , Miller BC , Borg-Stein J . Regenerative medicine for axial and radicular spine-related pain: a narrative review. Pain Pract. 2020;20(4):437453. 10.1111/papr.12868
  4. 4.
    Maloney J , Strand N , Wie C , et al . Current review of regenerative medicine therapies for spine-related pain. Curr Pain Headache Rep. 2024;28(9):949955. 10.1007/s11916-023-01194-3
  5. 5.
    Daar AS , Greenwood HL . A proposed definition of regenerative medicine. J Tissue Eng Regen Med. 2007;1(3):179184. 10.1002/term.20
  6. 6.
    Mason C , Dunnill P . A brief definition of regenerative medicine. Regen Med. 2008;3(1):15. 10.2217/17460751.3.1.1
  7. 7.
    Corbin CB , Pangrazi RP . Toward a uniform definition of wellness: a commentary. Research Digest. 2001;3(15):18.
  8. 8.
    IsHak WW . The Handbook of Wellness Medicineed. Cambridge University Press; 2020. 10.26226/morressier.60c8d83cbea1445efd9a1905
  9. 9.
    Majeed M , Nagabhushanam K , Prakasan P , Mundkur L . The pursuit of natural medicine—a current perspective. Nutrition Science, Marketing Nutrition, Health Claims, and Public Policy. Elsevier; 2023:173192. 10.1016/B978-0-323-85615-7.00030-6
  10. 10.
    Brown KW , Ryan RM . The benefits of being present: mindfulness and its role in psychological well-being. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2003;84(4):822848. 10.1037/0022-3514.84.4.822
  11. 11.
    Pilzer PZ . The New Wellness Revolution: How to Make a Fortune in the next Trillion Dollar Industryed. John Wiley and Sons; 2007.
  12. 12.
    Goldschlager T , Oehme D , Ghosh P , Zannettino A , Rosenfeld JV , Jenkin G . Current and future applications for stem cell therapies in spine surgery. Curr Stem Cell Res Ther. 2013;8(5):381393. 10.2174/1574888x113089990048
  13. 13.
    Kawabata S , Akeda K , Yamada J , et al . Advances in platelet-rich plasma treatment for spinal diseases: a systematic review. Int J Mol Sci. 2023;24(8):7677. 10.3390/ijms24087677
  14. 14.
    Falla D , Hodges PW . Individualized exercise interventions for spinal pain. Exerc Sport Sci Rev. 2017;45(2):105115. 10.1249/JES.0000000000000103
  15. 15.
    Nadin M . Redefining medicine from an anticipatory perspective. Prog Biophys Mol Biol. 2018;140:2140. 10.1016/j.pbiomolbio.2018.04.003
  16. 16.
    Gisco A , Ancarani F . Wellness Marketing: New Strategies for New Trends. EGEA spa; 2014.
  17. 17.
    Vos T , Lim SS , Abbafati C , et al . Global burden of 369 diseases and injuries in 204 countries and territories, 1990–2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. The Lancet. 2020;396(10258):12041222. 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30925-9
  18. 18.
    Ferreira ML , de Luca K , Haile L , et al . Global, regional, and national burden of low back pain, 1990-2020, its attributable risk factors, and projections to 2050: a systematic analysis of the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021. Lancet Rheumatol. 2023;5:e316e329. 10.2139/ssrn.4318392
  19. 19.
    Woods Ba Biol Mba T , Manson Brown S , Page B . Living longer better. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2021;148(6S):7S13S. 10.1097/PRS.0000000000008780
  20. 20.
    Scott AJ . The longevity society. Lancet Healthy Longev. 2021;2(12):e820e827. 10.1016/S2666-7568(21)00247-6
  21. 21.
    Garmany A , Yamada S , Terzic A . Longevity leap: mind the healthspan gap. NPJ Regen Med. 2021;6(1):57. 10.1038/s41536-021-00169-5
  22. 22.
    Khullar D , Fisher J , Chandra A . Trickle-down innovation and the longevity of nations. The Lancet. 2019;393(10187):22722274. 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)30345-9
  23. 23.
    Scott AJ . Achieving a three-dimensional longevity dividend. Nat Aging. 2021;1(6):500505. 10.1038/s43587-021-00074-y
  24. 24.
    Tziraki-Segal C , De Luca V , Santana S , et al . Creating a culture of health in planning and implementing innovative strategies addressing non-communicable chronic diseases. Front Sociol. 2019;4:9. 10.3389/fsoc.2019.00009
  25. 25.
    Atala A , Murphy S . Regenerative medicine. JAMA. 2015;313(14):14131414. 10.1001/jama.2015.1492
  26. 26.
    Gordon JS . The paradigm of holistic medicine. Health for the Whole Person. Routledge; 2019:335. 10.4324/9780429052088-1
  27. 27.
    Muñoz MF , Marotta F , Ahmadi AM . Anti-aging and rejuvenation based on stem cell therapy. Emerging Anti-Aging Strategies. Springer; 2023:7998.
  28. 28.
    Ahmed T , Dey R , Mukherjee J , Samadder A , Nandi S . Age related osteoarthritis: regenerative therapy, synthetic drugs, and naturopathy to combat abnormal signal transduction. Curr Signal Transduction Ther. 2022;17(3):925. 10.2174/1574362417666220610153540
  29. 29.
    Chen Y , Tang L . Stem cell senescence: the obstacle of the treatment of degenerative disk disease. Curr Stem Cell Res Ther. 2019;14(8):654668. 10.2174/1574888X14666190906163253
  30. 30.
    Lo JH , U KP , Yiu T , Ong MT , Lee WY . Sarcopenia: current treatments and new regenerative therapeutic approaches. J Orthop Translat. 2020;23:3852. 10.1016/j.jot.2020.04.002
  31. 31.
    Talukder MB , Hossain SE , Al Ferdous F , Khan MR . Exploring the rise of wellness tourism: trends, benefits, and market potential. AI Technologies and Advancements for Psychological Well-Being and Healthcare. IGI Global; 2025:351378.
  32. 32.
    Keehan SP , Stone DA , Poisal JA , et al . National health expenditure projections, 2016–25: price increases, aging push sector to 20 percent of economy. Health Aff (Millwood). 2017;36(3):553563. 10.1377/hlthaff.2016.1627
  33. 33.
    Wellness Economy Statistics & Facts . Global Wellness Institute. 2023. https://globalwellnessinstitute.org/press-room/statistics-and-facts.
  34. 34.
    Goldstein M . Alternative Health Care. Temple University Press; 2010.
  35. 35.
    Dagenais S , Brady OD , Haldeman S , Manga P . A systematic review comparing the costs of chiropractic care to other interventions for spine pain in the United States. BMC Health Serv Res. 2015;15:474. 10.1186/s12913-015-1140-5
  36. 36.
    Pilotti J . Non-specific low back pain and personal training: part II. 2016. https://www.jennpilotti.com/blog/2016/2/20/non-specific-low-back-pain-and-personal-training-part-ii.
  37. 37.
    Giles LGF , Muller R . Chronic spinal pain: a randomized clinical trial comparing medication, acupuncture, and spinal manipulation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2003;28(14):14901502. 10.1097/00007632-200307150-00003
  38. 38.
    Crow EM , Jeannot E , Trewhela A . Effectiveness of Iyengar yoga in treating spinal (back and neck) pain: a systematic review. Int J Yoga. 2015;8(1):3. 10.4103/0973-6131.146046
  39. 39.
    Soares LO , Ferreira GE , Costa LOP , Nogueira LC , Meziat-Filho N , Reis FJJ . Meditation for adults with non-specific low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Scand J Pain. 2022;22(1):2639. 10.1515/sjpain-2021-0096
  40. 40.
    Belal S . Diet and Nutritional Status of the Adult with the Symptoms of Spinal Pain Attending in Selected Hospital. University of Dhaka; 2019.
  41. 41.
    Metikaridis DT , Hadjipavlou A , Artemiadis A , Chrousos GP , Darviri C . Effect of a stress management program on subjects with neck pain: a pilot randomized controlled trial. J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil. 2017;30(1):2333. 10.3233/BMR-160709
  42. 42.
    Cramer H , Haller H , Lauche R , Dobos G . Mindfulness-based stress reduction for low back pain. a systematic review. BMC Complement Altern Med. 2012;12:18:162. 10.1186/1472-6882-12-162
  43. 43.
    Frazier KC . Affording medicines for today’s patients and sustaining innovation for tomorrow. JAMA. 2020;323(9):831833. 10.1001/jama.2020.0167
  44. 44.
    Kim CH , Chung CK , Choi Y , et al . Direct medical costs after surgical or nonsurgical treatment for degenerative lumbar spinal disease: a nationwide matched cohort study with a 10-year follow-up. PLoS One. 2021;16(12):e0260460. 10.1371/journal.pone.0260460
  45. 45.
    Lewandrowski K-U . Lumbar Spine. Bentham Science Publishers; 2022.
  46. 46.
    Lewandrowski K-U , López WOC , León JFR , Dowling Á , Lorio MP . Regenerative Medicine & Peripheral Nerve Endoscopy. Bentham Science Publishers; 2024.
  47. 47.
    Lewandrowski KU , Dowling A , Vera JC , Leon JFR , Telfeian AE , Lorio MP . Pain relief after allogenic stem cell disc therapy. Pain Physician. 2023;26(2):197206.
  48. 48.
    de Magalhães JP , Stevens M , Thornton D . The business of anti-aging science. Trends Biotechnol. 2017;35(11):10621073. 10.1016/j.tibtech.2017.07.004
  49. 49.
    Scott AJ . The longevity economy. Lancet Healthy Longev. 2021;2(12):e828e835. 10.1016/S2666-7568(21)00250-6
  50. 50.
    Lorio M , Lewandrowski KU , Coric D , Phillips F , Shaffrey CI . International Society for the Advancement of Spine Surgery statement: restorative neurostimulation for chronic mechanical low back pain resulting from neuromuscular instability. Int J Spine Surg. 2023;17(5):728750. 10.14444/8525
  51. 51.
    Tolson JK , Menuet RL , Ly GH , et al . Evolving role of VIADISC for chronic low back and discogenic pain: a narrative review. Expert Opin Emerg Drugs. 2024;29(2):155164. 10.1080/14728214.2024.2339912
  52. 52.
    Makhni MC , Caldwell J-M , Saifi C , et al . Tissue engineering advances in spine surgery. Regen Med. 2016;11(2):211222. 10.2217/rme.16.3
  53. 53.
    Nishida K , Gilbertson LG , Evans CH , Kang JD . Spine update: potential applications of gene therapy to the treatment of spinal disorders. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000;25(10):13081314. 10.1097/00007632-200005150-00021
  54. 54.
    Lewandrowski K-U , Vira S , Elfar JC , Lorio MP . Advancements in custom 3D-printed titanium interbody spinal fusion cages and their relevance in personalized spine care. J Pers Med. 2024;14(8):809. 10.3390/jpm14080809
  55. 55.
    Wong AY , Karppinen J , Samartzis D . Low back pain in older adults: risk factors, management options and future directions. Scoliosis Spinal Disord. 2017;12:14. 10.1186/s13013-017-0121-3
View Abstract
Loading
Loading