Purpose: The biomechanical behaviour of the cervical spine was studied in vitro with an optoelectronic system in order to better understand its physiology.

Material: Twenty fresh cervical spines (occiput-D1) from fourteen men and six women, mean age 66.5 years, were sterilised with ß radiation (2.5 Mrad) and stored at −24°C then studied after slow thawing and excision of the paraspinal muscles.

Methods: Three-point reflecting markers were rapidly attached to each vertebral segment (4 or 5 vertebrae). The inferior vertebra was blocked. Six pure moment couples (2 N.m maximum, 10 increments) were applied in the three anatomic planes using a loading device lodged on the superior vertebra. Displacements were measured with the VICON 140 using a kinematic software.

Results: The three-dimensional behaviour curves of each functional unit (FU) were recorded for each solicitation to analyse the principal movement and coupled movements (maximum mobility, neutral zones, rigid zones, rigidity). Mean maximal flexion-extension movements were C0/C1= 28.7°; C1/C2 = 22.3°; C2/C3 = 7.3°; C3/C4 = 10.6°; C4/C5 = 13.8°; C5/C6 = 13.4°; C6/C7 = 10.8°; C7/T1 = 6.4°. Maximum overall lateral inclinations were: C0/C1= 8.7°; C1/C2 = 9.3°; C2/C3 = 8.7°; C3/C4 = 6.7°; C4/C5 = 10.5°; C5/C6 = 12.2°; C6/C7 = 8.6°; C7/T1 = 5.7°. Maximal overall axial rotations were: C0/C1= 11°; C1/C2 = 71°; C2/C3 = 9.5°; C3/C4 = 10.8°; C4/C5 = 12.3°; C5/C6 = 9°; C6/C7 = 5.6°; C7/T1 = 5.7°. All the FU exhibited flexion-extension movement. Lateral inclination coupled important controlateral rotation for C1/C2 and minimal ipsilateral rotation (< 10°) in the lower FU of the cervical spine. Axial rotation of the C1/T1 functional unit was coupled with homolateral rotation (< 10°).

Discussion: Our experimental protocol provided precision of < 1° and good reproducibility allowing simultaneous three-dimensional analysis of the spinal functional units. Making measurements without direct contact is particularly useful for the cervical spine. Our results are within the experimental corridor defined by Goel, Panjabi and Wen.

Conclusion: This work on a large number of functional units adds further support to data in the literature concerning the biomechanical behaviour of the cervical spine. Our protocol could be applied to analyse the impact of surgical procedures used for the cervical spine, particularly for the evaluation of new fixation systems or prostheses.