Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 2 of 2
Results per page:
Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 7, Issue 1 | Pages 28 - 35
1 Jan 2018
Huang H Nightingale RW Dang ABC

Objectives. Loss of motion following spine segment fusion results in increased strain in the adjacent motion segments. However, to date, studies on the biomechanics of the cervical spine have not assessed the role of coupled motions in the lumbar spine. Accordingly, we investigated the biomechanics of the cervical spine following cervical fusion and lumbar fusion during simulated whiplash using a whole-human finite element (FE) model to simulate coupled motions of the spine. Methods. A previously validated FE model of the human body in the driver-occupant position was used to investigate cervical hyperextension injury. The cervical spine was subjected to simulated whiplash exposure in accordance with Euro NCAP (the European New Car Assessment Programme) testing using the whole human FE model. The coupled motions between the cervical spine and lumbar spine were assessed by evaluating the biomechanical effects of simulated cervical fusion and lumbar fusion. Results. Peak anterior longitudinal ligament (ALL) strain ranged from 0.106 to 0.382 in a normal spine, and from 0.116 to 0.399 in a fused cervical spine. Strain increased from cranial to caudal levels. The mean strain increase in the motion segment immediately adjacent to the site of fusion from C2-C3 through C5-C6 was 26.1% and 50.8% following single- and two-level cervical fusion, respectively (p = 0.03, unpaired two-way t-test). Peak cervical strains following various lumbar-fusion procedures were 1.0% less than those seen in a healthy spine (p = 0.61, two-way ANOVA). Conclusion. Cervical arthrodesis increases peak ALL strain in the adjacent motion segments. C3-4 experiences greater changes in strain than C6-7. Lumbar fusion did not have a significant effect on cervical spine strain. Cite this article: H. Huang, R. W. Nightingale, A. B. C. Dang. Biomechanics of coupled motion in the cervical spine during simulated whiplash in patients with pre-existing cervical or lumbar spinal fusion: A Finite Element Study. Bone Joint Res 2018;7:28–35. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.71.BJR-2017-0100.R1


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 96-B, Issue SUPP_4 | Pages 12 - 12
1 Feb 2014
Zanjani-Pour S Winlove CP Smith CW Meakin JR
Full Access

Purpose of the study. To incorporate magnetic resonance (MR) image data in a finite element (FE) model to estimate intervertebral disc stress as a function of posture. Background. Determining the stresses on the intervertebral discs is important for understanding disc degeneration and developing treatment strategies. The effect of different postures on disc stress has previously been investigated through disc pressure measurements and through computational modelling. Kinematic data derived from MR images and used in an FE model may provide a non-invasive way of assessing a wide range of subjects and postures. Methods. Two-dimensional FE models of the lumbar spine were created for four subjects. Vertebral bodies were modelled as rigid bodies, the disc was modelled with an isotropic elastic annulus (E = 2.5 MPa, ν=0.4) and nucleus (E = 1 MPa, ν=0.45). The geometry was defined from MR image data obtained in the supine posture; vertebral body translation and rotation were determined from images acquired in standing and sitting. Results. The principle stress distribution in standing and sitting differed between subjects. Stress peaks occurred in different discs (L4L5 v L5S1) and in different regions of the annulus (anterior v posterior). In three subjects the compressive stress at L4L5 was largest in sitting, for the fourth subject it was largest in standing; shear stress at L4L5 was highest in sitting for all four subjects. Conclusion. Kinematic data from MR images provides a way of assessing the effect of postural change on disc stress; inter-subject differences in L4L5 compressive stress are consistent with disc pressure measurements