Biomécanique du rachis

Skalli, Wafa; Champain, Sabina; Mosnier, T.

doi:10.1016/b978-2-84299-844-8.50002-1

Cited by 8 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Since an increase in SS has been linked to an increase in lumbar lordosis to maintain the same position and horizontality of the head and eyes (Lazennec et al, 2011b;Schuller et al, 2011;Skalli et al, 2007), and SS may be higher in an OA patient (see above), vigilance is needed when planning lumbosacral fusion in patients with hip OA since the pelvis and femur are less able to provide compensatory motion. Similar vigilance is needed when planning for hip arthroplasty since the position of the pelvis affects the functional inclination and anteversion of the acetabulum (Lazennec et al, 2011b), as also seen by the correlation between sagittal pelvic tilt and acetabular abduction (ρ = 0.63) (Lazennec et al, 2012).…”

Section: Relationships Of Sacral Slope With Pelvic Incidence (Pi) Andmentioning

confidence: 97%

Healthy vs. osteoarthritic hips: A comparison of hip, pelvis and femoral parameters and relationships using the EOS® system

Bendaya

Lazennec

Anglin

et al. 2015

Clinical Biomechanics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Differences between the groups suggest either degenerative changes over time or inherent differences between individuals that may contribute to the disease progression. These data provide a basis for longitudinal and post-surgery studies. Due to the considerable variability amongst individuals and the considerable overlap between groups, patients should be evaluated individually and at multiple joints when planning hip, knee and spine surgery.

show abstract

Section: Relationships Of Sacral Slope With Pelvic Incidence (Pi) Andmentioning

confidence: 97%

Healthy vs. osteoarthritic hips: A comparison of hip, pelvis and femoral parameters and relationships using the EOS® system

Bendaya

Lazennec

Anglin

et al. 2015

Clinical Biomechanics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Biomechanics Of Vertebral Compression Fracturesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Alf Nachemson and other authors previously reported that a lumbar functional spinal unit (SFU) can support a maximum axial weight of 500 kg, but a bending moment of only 20 Nm in flexion [29,30]. Consequently, if the lever arm length is increased by only 10 cm, the maximal weight supported by the SFU will be reduced to 20 kg [30]. It is, thus, important to restore the anterior wall height of a fractured vertebra, to prevent the risk of additional adjacent fractures or domino effect (DE) [31] (Fig.…”

Section: Biomechanics Of Vertebral Compression Fracturesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The mechanism in junctional failure of thoraco-lumbar fusions. Part I: Biomechanical analysis of mechanisms responsible of vertebral overstress and description of the cervical inclination angle (CIA)

Huec¹,

Richards²,

Tsoupras

et al. 2017

Eur Spine J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The T1-T5 segment inclination is correlated with the C7 slope, and because the latter defines the cervical curve as previously shown, the T1-T5 segment can be considered as the base from which the cervical spine originates. Its role is, thus, similar to the pelvis and its sacral slope, which is the base from which the lumbar spine originates. The CIA along with the ODHA, which describes the adequacy of the global balance in young and elderly asymptomatic populations, are two important parameters that could help us to better understand junctional breakdowns in thoraco-lumbar fusion surgeries.

show abstract

“…Generally, these are measured via in-vitro quasi-static or dynamic experiments in which the functional spine unit is loaded until failure. The maximum admissible loads vary from 1000 N -4000 N for the cervical spine to 5000 N -13000 N for the lumbar spine (Hutton and Adams, 1982;Nuckley et al, 2013;Panjabi and Myers, 1995;Skalli et al, 2007). Note however that, although the physiological charges are rather high (100 N -400 N for the cervical spine and 3000 N -5000 N for the lumbar spine) (Nachemson, 1975;Wilke et al, 1999;Yoganandan et al, 1991), the torques low: 2 Nm for the cervical spine up to 20 Nm for the lumbar spine.…”

Section: Vertebral Mobilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Spine

Laporte¹,

Abbeele²,

Rohan³

et al. 2017

Biomechanics of Living Organs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Clinical problems of the human spine have a high prevalence, affecting more than 25.5 M persons 2012. Older adults, in particular, form a continuously growing age group, with degenerative spine disorders such as deformities or osteoporosis. A basic requirement for proper management of various spinal disorders, effective injury prevention and rehabilitation is a detailed knowledge of the fundamental biomechanics of the spine. Despite the growing interest for biomechanical research on the spine during the last decades however, many clinical problems remain largely unsolved due to the poor understanding of the underlying degeneration phenomena and the complexity of the spinal construct. In particular, diagnosis is challenging, because of the lack of tools to quantitatively assess soft tissue alteration and because the most relevant clinical indices for diagnosis are not clearly established. Driven by the ever-growing computer power and imaging devices, the development of FE models has become widespread and have allowed to overcome some of the existing shortcomings (invasiveness, complexity of the organization of the biological tissues and complexity of establishing the loads present in the human spine). These have thus emerged as powerful and reliable tools with considerable applications in surgery planning, in studying the etiology, progression and effects of spinal deformities and intervertebral disc. These models have enhanced our understanding of the spine and will continue to do so in the future. In our group, numerical work performed using of a FE modeling has highlighted the paramount influence of both geometric patient-specific modeling and in-vivo personalization of tissue mechanical properties. There are many exciting avenues for future research. Amongst these, the question of the validation of computational modeling and simulation with the perspective of supporting the development of medical devices is central.

show abstract

Biomécanique du rachis

Cited by 8 publications

References 25 publications

Healthy vs. osteoarthritic hips: A comparison of hip, pelvis and femoral parameters and relationships using the EOS® system

Healthy vs. osteoarthritic hips: A comparison of hip, pelvis and femoral parameters and relationships using the EOS® system

The mechanism in junctional failure of thoraco-lumbar fusions. Part I: Biomechanical analysis of mechanisms responsible of vertebral overstress and description of the cervical inclination angle (CIA)

Spine

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About