Comparison of Intervertebral ROM in Multi-Level Cadaveric Lumbar Spines Using Distinct Pure Moment Loading Approaches

Santoni, Brandon G.; Cabezas, Andres F.; Cook, Daniel; Yeager, Matthew S.; Billys, James B.; Whiting, Benjamin B.; Cheng, Boyle C.

doi:10.14444/2032

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous studies demonstrated the importance of disc hydration, 3‐5 preload, 6‐9 and test rate 10‐15 . More recently, studies have compared biomechanical testing between laboratories, to investigate the application of pure moments to multi‐level spinal specimens 16 and to assess differences between six‐axis testing systems 17 . These studies have highlighted the importance of consistent methods for data processing, yet there is still a lack of consistency in specimen preparation and testing conditions used throughout the spinal community 18 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of testing environment and loading rate on intervertebral disc compressive mechanics: An assessment of repeatability at three different laboratories

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In vitro mechanical testing of intervertebral discs is crucial for basic science and preclinical testing. Generally, these tests aim to replicate in vivo conditions, but simplifications are necessary in specimen preparation and mechanical testing due to complexities in both structure and the loading conditions required to replicate in vivo conditions. There has been a growing interest in developing a consensus of testing protocols within the spine community to improve comparison of results between studies. The objective of this study was to perform axial compression experiments on bovine bone-disc-bone specimens at three institutions. No differences were observed between testing environment being air, with PBS soaked gauze, or a PBS bath (P > .206). A 100-fold increase in loading rate resulted in a small (2%) but significant increase in compressive mechanics (P < .017). A 7% difference in compressive stiffness between Labs B and C was eliminated when values were adjusted for test system compliance. Specimens tested at Lab A, however, were found to be stiffer than specimens from Lab B and C. Even after normalizing for disc geometry and adjusting for system compliance, an 35% difference was observed between UK based labs (B and C) and the USA based lab (A). Large differences in specimen stiffness may be due to genetic differences between breeds or in agricultural feed and use of growth hormones; highlighting significant challenges in comparing mechanics data across studies. This research provides a standardized test protocol for the comparison of spinal specimens and provides steps towards understanding how location and test setup may affect biomechanical results.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of testing environment and loading rate on intervertebral disc compressive mechanics: An assessment of repeatability at three different laboratories

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Vascular Reconstruction After En Bloc Resection

Tobert

Schwab

2021

Chordoma of the Spine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biomechanical Effect of Hybrid Dynamic Stabilization Implant on the Segmental Motion and Intradiscal Pressure in Human Lumbar Spine

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The hybrid dynamic stabilization system, Dynesys-Transition-Optima, represents a novel pedicle-based construct for the treatment of lumbar degenerative disease. The theoretical advantage of this system is to stabilize the treated segment and preserve the range of motion within the adjacent segment while potentially decreasing the risk of adjacent segment disease following lumbar arthrodesis. Satisfactory short-term outcomes were previously demonstrated in the Dynesys-Transition-Optima system. However, long-term follow-up reported accelerated degeneration of adjacent segments and segmental instability above the fusion level. This study investigated the biomechanical effects of the Dynesys-Transition-Optima system on segment motion and intradiscal pressure at adjacent and implanted levels. Segmental range of motion and intradiscal pressure were evaluated under the conditions of the intact spine, with a static fixator at L4–5, and implanted with DTO at L3–4 (Dynesys fixator) and L4–5 (static fixator) by applying the loading conditions of flexion/extension (±7.5 Nm) and lateral bending (±7.5 Nm), with/without a follower preload of 500 N. Our results showed that the hybrid Dynesys-Transition-Optima system can significantly reduce the ROM at the fusion level (L4–L5), whereas the range of motion at the adjacent level (L3–4) significantly increased. The increase in physiological loading could be an important factor in the increment of IDP at the intervertebral discs at the lumbar spine. The Dynesys-Transition-Optima system can preserve the mobility of the stabilized segments with a lesser range of motion on the transition segment; it may help to prevent the occurrence of adjacent segment degeneration. However, the current study cannot cover all the issues of adjacent segmental diseases. Future investigations of large-scale and long-term follow-ups are needed.

show abstract

Comparison of Intervertebral ROM in Multi-Level Cadaveric Lumbar Spines Using Distinct Pure Moment Loading Approaches

Cited by 3 publications

References 30 publications

Influence of testing environment and loading rate on intervertebral disc compressive mechanics: An assessment of repeatability at three different laboratories

Influence of testing environment and loading rate on intervertebral disc compressive mechanics: An assessment of repeatability at three different laboratories

Vascular Reconstruction After En Bloc Resection

Biomechanical Effect of Hybrid Dynamic Stabilization Implant on the Segmental Motion and Intradiscal Pressure in Human Lumbar Spine

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About