Axial Rotation and Lateral Bending in the Normal Lumbar Spine Measured by Three-Dimensional Radiography

Spine ◽  
1984 ◽  
Vol 9 (6) ◽  
pp. 582-587 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. J. PEARCY ◽  
S. B. TIBREWAL
Keyword(s):  
Lumbar Spine ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Axial Rotation ◽  
Lateral Bending

Hybrid dynamic stabilization: a biomechanical assessment of adjacent and supraadjacent levels of the lumbar spine

2012 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 232-242 ◽  
Author(s):  
Prasath Mageswaran ◽  
Fernando Techy ◽  
Robb W. Colbrunn ◽  
Tara F. Bonner ◽  
Robert F. McLain
Keyword(s):  
Lumbar Spine ◽  
Lumbar Fusion ◽  
Industrial Robot ◽  
Pedicle Screws ◽  
Axial Rotation ◽  
Dynamic Stabilization ◽  
Follower Load ◽  
Lateral Bending ◽  
Intact Specimen ◽  
Flexion Extension

Object The object of this study was to evaluate the effect of hybrid dynamic stabilization on adjacent levels of the lumbar spine. Methods Seven human spine specimens from T-12 to the sacrum were used. The following conditions were implemented: 1) intact spine; 2) fusion of L4–5 with bilateral pedicle screws and titanium rods; and 3) supplementation of the L4–5 fusion with pedicle screw dynamic stabilization constructs at L3–4, with the purpose of protecting the L3–4 level from excessive range of motion (ROM) and to create a smoother motion transition to the rest of the lumbar spine. An industrial robot was used to apply continuous pure moment (± 2 Nm) in flexion-extension with and without a follower load, lateral bending, and axial rotation. Intersegmental rotations of the fused, dynamically stabilized, and adjacent levels were measured and compared. Results In flexion-extension only, the rigid instrumentation at L4–5 caused a 78% decrease in the segment's ROM when compared with the intact specimen. To compensate, it caused an increase in motion at adjacent levels L1–2 (45.6%) and L2–3 (23.2%) only. The placement of the dynamic construct at L3–4 decreased the operated level's ROM by 80.4% (similar stability as the fusion at L4–5), when compared with the intact specimen, and caused a significant increase in motion at all tested adjacent levels. In flexion-extension with a follower load, instrumentation at L4–5 affected only a subadjacent level, L5–sacrum (52.0%), while causing a reduction in motion at the operated level (L4–5, −76.4%). The dynamic construct caused a significant increase in motion at the adjacent levels T12–L1 (44.9%), L1–2 (57.3%), and L5–sacrum (83.9%), while motion at the operated level (L3–4) was reduced by 76.7%. In lateral bending, instrumentation at L4–5 increased motion at only T12–L1 (22.8%). The dynamic construct at L3–4 caused an increase in motion at T12–L1 (69.9%), L1–2 (59.4%), L2–3 (44.7%), and L5–sacrum (43.7%). In axial rotation, only the placement of the dynamic construct at L3–4 caused a significant increase in motion of the adjacent levels L2–3 (25.1%) and L5–sacrum (31.4%). Conclusions The dynamic stabilization system displayed stability characteristics similar to a solid, all-metal construct. Its addition of the supraadjacent level (L3–4) to the fusion (L4–5) did protect the adjacent level from excessive motion. However, it essentially transformed a 1-level lumbar fusion into a 2-level lumbar fusion, with exponential transfer of motion to the fewer remaining discs.

scholarly journals Kinematics of the Lumbo–Pelvic Complex under Different Loading Conditions

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 347-349
Author(s):  
Martin Weidling ◽  
Christian Voigt ◽  
Toni Wendler ◽  
Martin Heilemann ◽  
Michael Werner ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Axial Rotation ◽  
Image Correlation ◽  
Loading Conditions ◽  
Structural System ◽  
Lateral Bending ◽  
Test Rig ◽  
Hip Joints ◽  
Complex Structural ◽  
The Right

AbstractThe lumbo-pelvic complex is a highly complex structural system. The current investigation aims to identify the kinematics between interacting bone segments under different loading conditions. A specimen of the lumbo-pelvic complex was obtained from a human body donor and tested in a self-developed test rig. The experimental setup was designed to imitate extension, flexion, right and left lateral bending and axial rotation to the left and to the right, respectively. The vertebra L3 was firmly embedded and load was introduced via hip joints. Using a digital image correlation (DIC) system, the 3D motions of 15 markers at different landmarks were measured for each loadcase under cyclic loading. For each loadcase, the kinematics were analyzed in terms of three-dimensional relative movements between L3 and the sacrum. The usefulness of the experimental technique was demonstrated. It may serve for further biomechanical investigations of relative motion of sacroiliac and vertebral joints and deformation of bony structures.

Design and development of a novel expanding flexible rod device (FRD) for stability in the lumbar spine: A finite-element study

2020 ◽  
Vol 43 (12) ◽  
pp. 803-810 ◽  
Author(s):  
Masud Rana ◽  
Sandipan Roy ◽  
Palash Biswas ◽  
Shishir Kumar Biswas ◽  
Jayanta Kumar Biswas
Keyword(s):  
Finite Element ◽  
Lumbar Spine ◽  
Range Of Motion ◽  
Pedicle Screw ◽  
Axial Rotation ◽  
Von Mises Stress ◽  
Lateral Bending ◽  
Intact Bone ◽  
Flexion Extension ◽  
Von Mises

The aim of this study is to design a novel expanding flexible rod device, for pedicle screw fixation to provide dynamic stability, based on strength and flexibility. Three-dimensional finite-element models of lumbar spine (L1-S) with flexible rod device on L3-L4-L5 levels are developed. The implant material is taken to be Ti-6Al-4V. The models are simulated under different boundary conditions, and the results are compared with intact model. In natural model, total range of motion under 10 Nm moment were found 66.7°, 24.3° and 13.59°, respectively during flexion–extension, lateral bending and axial rotation. The von Mises stress at intact bone was 4 ± 2 MPa and at bone, adjacent to the screw in the implanted bone, was 6 ± 3 MPa. The von Mises stress of disc of intact bone varied from 0.36 to 2.13 MPa while that of the disc between the fixed vertebra of the fixation model reduced by approximately 10% for flexion and 25% for extension compared to intact model. The von Mises stresses of pedicle screw were 120, 135, 110 and 90 MPa during flexion, extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation, respectively. All the stress values were within the safe limit of the material. Using the flexible rod device, flexibility was significantly increased in flexion/extension but not in axial rotation and lateral bending. The results suggest that dynamic stabilization system with respect to fusion is more effective for homogenizing the range of motion of the spine.

Craniovertebral junction fixation with transarticular screws: biomechanical analysis of a novel technique

2003 ◽  
Vol 98 (2) ◽  
pp. 202-209 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. Fernando Gonzalez ◽  
Neil R. Crawford ◽  
Robert H. Chamberlain ◽  
Luis E. Perez Garza ◽  
Mark C. Preul ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Axial Rotation ◽  
Craniovertebral Junction ◽  
Biomechanical Analysis ◽  
Lateral Bending ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Additional Stability ◽  
A New Technique ◽  
Flexion And Extension ◽  
Fine Print

Object. The authors compared the biomechanical stability resulting from the use of a new technique for occipitoatlantal motion segment fixation with an established method and assessed the additional stability provided by combining the two techniques. Methods. Specimens were loaded using nonconstraining pure moments while recording the three-dimensional angular movement at occiput (Oc)—C1 and C1–2. Specimens were tested intact and after destabilization and fixation as follows: 1) Oc—C1 transarticular screws plus C1–2 transarticular screws; 2) occipitocervical transarticular (OCTA) plate in which C1–2 transarticular screws attach to a loop from Oc to C-2; and (3) OCTA plate plus Oc—C1 transarticular screws. Occipitoatlantal transarticular screws reduced motion to well within the normal range. The OCTA loop and transarticular screws allowed a very small neutral zone, elastic zone, and range of motion during lateral bending and axial rotation. The transarticular screws, however, were less effective than the OCTA loop in resisting flexion and extension. Conclusions. Biomechanically, Oc—C1 transarticular screws performed well enough to be considered as an alternative for Oc—C1 fixation, especially when instability at C1–2 is minimal. Techniques for augmenting these screws posteriorly by using a wired bone graft buttress, as is currently undertaken with C1–2 transarticular screws, may be needed for optimal performance.

scholarly journals Primary stability of the Activ L® intervertebral disc prosthesis in cadaver bone and comparison of the keel and spike anchoring concept

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christoph von Schulze Pellengahr ◽  
Wolfram Teske ◽  
Saurabh Kapoor ◽  
Alexander Klein ◽  
Bernd Wegener ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lumbar Spine ◽  
Intervertebral Disc ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Primary Stability ◽  
Longitudinal Axis ◽  
Axial Rotation ◽  
Disc Prosthesis ◽  
Mean Values ◽  
Intervertebral Disc Prosthesis ◽  
Flexion Extension

Abstract Background: High primary stability is the key prerequisite for safe osseointegration of cementless intervertebral disc prosthesis. The aim of our study was to determine the primary stability of intervertebral disc prosthesis with two different anchoring concepts – keel and spike anchoring. Methods: 10 ActivL intervertebral disc prosthesis (5 x keel anchoring, 5 x spike anchoring) implanted in human cadaver lumbar spine specimens were tested in a spine movement simulator. Under axial load flexion, extension, left and right bending and axial rotation were applied on the lumbar spine specimens through a defined three-dimensional movement program as per ISO 2631 and ISO/CD 18192-1.3 standards. Micromotion of the implants covering every single movement axis were measured for both anchor types and compared using Student’s T-test for significance after calculating 95% confidence intervals. Results: In the transverse axis, the keel anchoring concept showed lower statistically significant (p<0.05) mean values of micromotion compared to spike anchoring concept. The highest micromotion values for both types were observed in the longitudinal axis. The data achieved the threshold of primary stability (150-200 μm).Conclusions: Both fixation systems fulfil the required criteria of primary stability. Independent of the selected anchorage type an immediate postoperative active mobilization doesn’t compromise the stability of the prostheses.

Effect of Facetectomy on the Three-Dimensional Biomechanical Properties of the Fourth Canine Cervical Functional Spinal Unit: A Cadaveric Study

2017 ◽  
Vol 30 (06) ◽  
pp. 430-437 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nadja Bösch ◽  
Martin Hofstetter ◽  
Alexander Bürki ◽  
Beatriz Vidondo ◽  
Fenella Davies ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Range Of Motion ◽  
Motion Analysis ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Axial Rotation ◽  
Biomechanical Properties ◽  
Lateral Bending ◽  
Coupled Motion ◽  
Functional Spinal Unit ◽  
Flexion Extension

Abstract Objective To study the biomechanical effect of facetectomy in 10 large breed dogs (>24 kg body weight) on the fourth canine cervical functional spinal unit. Methods Canine cervical spines were freed from all muscles. Spines were mounted on a six-degrees-of-freedom spine testing machine for three-dimensional motion analysis. Data were recorded with an optoelectronic motion analysis system. The range of motion wasdetermined inall threeprimary motionsaswellasrange of motion of coupled motions on the intact specimen, after unilateral and after bilateral facetectomy. Repeated-measures analysis of variance models were used to assess the changes of the biomechanical properties in the three treatment groups considered. Results Facetectomy increased range of motion of primary motions in all directions. Axial rotation was significantly influenced by facetectomy. Coupled motion was not influenced by facetectomy except for lateral bending with coupled motion axial rotation. The coupling factor (coupled motion/primary motion) decreased after facetectomy. Symmetry of motion was influenced by facetectomy in flexion–extension and axial rotation, but not in lateral bending. Clinical Significance Facet joints play a significant role in the stability of the cervical spine and act to maintain spatial integrity. Therefore, cervical spinal treatments requiring a facetectomy should be carefully planned and if an excessive increase in range of motion is expected, complications should be anticipated and reduced via spinal stabilization.

scholarly journals Primary stability of the Activ L® intervertebral disc prosthesis in cadaver bone and comparison of the keel and spike anchoring concept

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Christoph von Schulze Pellengahr ◽  
Wolfram Teske ◽  
Saurabh Kapoor ◽  
Alexander Klein ◽  
Bernd Wegener ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lumbar Spine ◽  
Intervertebral Disc ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Primary Stability ◽  
Longitudinal Axis ◽  
Axial Rotation ◽  
Mean Values ◽  
Flexion Extension ◽  
Student’S T ◽  
The Stability

Abstract Background High primary stability is the key prerequisite for safe osseointegration of cementless intervertebral disc prostheses. The aim of our study was to determine the primary stability of intervertebral disc prostheses with two different anchoring concepts – keel and spike anchoring. Methods Ten ActivL intervertebral disc prostheses (5 x keel anchoring, 5 x spike anchoring) implanted in human cadaver lumbar spine specimens were tested in a spine movement simulator. Axial load flexion, extension, left and right bending and axial rotation motions were applied on the lumbar spine specimens through a defined three-dimensional movement program following ISO 2631 and ISO/CD 18192-1.3 standards. Tri-dimensional micromotions of the implants were measured for both anchor types and compared using Student’s T-test for significance after calculating 95 % confidence intervals. Results In the transverse axis, the keel anchoring concept showed statistically significant (p < 0.05) lower mean values of micromotions compared to the spike anchoring concept. The highest micromotion values for both types were observed in the longitudinal axis. In no case the threshold of 200 micrometers was exceeded. Conclusions Both fixation systems fulfill the required criteria of primary stability. Independent of the selected anchorage type an immediate postoperative active mobilization doesn’t compromise the stability of the prostheses.

Effect of position and height of a mobile core type artificial disc on the biomechanical behaviour of the lumbar spine

2008 ◽  
Vol 222 (2) ◽  
pp. 229-239 ◽  
Author(s):  
A Rohlmann ◽  
T Zander ◽  
B Bock ◽  
G Bergmann
Keyword(s):  
Lumbar Spine ◽  
Facet Joint ◽  
Axial Rotation ◽  
Intradiscal Pressure ◽  
Upper Body ◽  
Artificial Disc ◽  
Lateral Bending ◽  
Implant Position ◽  
Joint Force ◽  
Flexion Extension

The extent of natural disc removal and the implant position and height of an artificial disc with a mobile core were studied for their effects on intersegmental rotation, intradiscal pressure, and facet joint force. A validated finite element model of the lumbar spine was used. The model was loaded with the upper body weight, a follower load, and muscle forces to simulate standing, flexion, extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation. The implant position was varied up to 2 mm in an anterior and posterior direction and up to 3 mm in a lateral direction. Three different implant heights were simulated. The effect of removing the lateral parts of the annulus was also studied. The implant position and height markedly affect intersegmental rotation and facet joint forces but have hardly any influence on intradiscal pressure in the adjacent discs. Removing the lateral parts of the annulus increases intersegmental rotation and facet joint force mainly for lateral bending and axial rotation. The calculated translation of the mobile implant core is about 1 mm at most, and thus its effect is often overestimated. Great care should be taken to choose the optimal implant height and to insert the implant in the best position for each individual patient.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document