Literature DB >> 14706329

Neutral zone and range of motion in the spine are greater with stepwise loading than with a continuous loading protocol. An in vitro porcine investigation.

Darrell J Goertzen1, Chris Lane, Thomas R Oxland.   

Abstract

Biomechanical testing of the spine has traditionally been performed to help understand the normal function of the spine as well as to evaluate the effects of injury and surgical procedures on spinal behaviour. The overall objective of this investigation was to compare traditional stepwise loading with the recently introduced continuous loading protocol, determining the effect of loading protocol on the mechanical behaviour of the spine. For all tests, a custom spine testing machine was used to apply pure moments of flexion extension, axial rotation, and lateral bending to a maximum of 2 Nm, using six porcine cervical spine specimens (C2-C4). Motions of C2 with respect to C4 were measured with an optoelectronic camera system. Motion parameters calculated were range of motion (ROM), neutral zone (NZ), and the ratio of NZ and ROM. The continuous loading protocol had smaller values for all motion parameters in each loading direction (p<0.05). ROM for the continuous test ranged between 88% and 93% of that of stepwise for the three loading directions. The continuous protocol NZ was 56-75% of that of the stepwise test. The findings of the study demonstrate that the two loading protocols provide differing spinal behaviours.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 14706329     DOI: 10.1016/s0021-9290(03)00307-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Biomech        ISSN: 0021-9290            Impact factor:   2.712


  12 in total

1.  Biomechanical evaluation of the Total Facet Arthroplasty System® (TFAS®): loading as compared to a rigid posterior instrumentation system.

Authors:  Simon G Sjovold; Qingan Zhu; Anton Bowden; Chad R Larson; Peter M de Bakker; Marta L Villarraga; Jorge A Ochoa; David M Rosler; Peter A Cripton
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2012-03-10       Impact factor: 3.134

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

Authors:  Brandon Santoni; Andres F Cabezas; Daniel J Cook; Matthew S Yeager; James B Billys; Benjamin Whiting; Boyle C Cheng
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2015-07-17

3.  Advanced Multi-Axis Spine Testing: Clinical Relevance and Research Recommendations.

Authors:  Timothy P Holsgrove; Nikhil R Nayak; William C Welch; Beth A Winkelstein
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2015-07-17

4.  Biomechanical characterization of the three-dimensional kinematic behaviour of the Dynesys dynamic stabilization system: an in vitro study.

Authors:  Christina A Niosi; Qingan A Zhu; Derek C Wilson; Ory Keynan; David R Wilson; Thomas R Oxland
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2005-10-11       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  Kinematic evaluation of one- and two-level Maverick lumbar total disc replacement caudal to a long thoracolumbar spinal fusion.

Authors:  Qingan Zhu; Eyal Itshayek; Claire F Jones; Timothy Schwab; Chadwick R Larson; Lawrence G Lenke; Peter A Cripton
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2012-04-25       Impact factor: 3.134

6.  The effect of loading rate and degeneration on neutral region motion in human cadaveric lumbar motion segments.

Authors:  Ralph E Gay; Brice Ilharreborde; Kristin Zhao; Emir Boumediene; Kai-Nan An
Journal:  Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)       Date:  2007-09-21       Impact factor: 2.063

7.  Biomechanical evaluation of an interfacet joint decompression and stabilization system.

Authors:  Jeremi M Leasure; Jenni Buckley
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 2.097

8.  Biomechanical in vitro evaluation of the complete porcine spine in comparison with data of the human spine.

Authors:  Hans-Joachim Wilke; Jürgen Geppert; Annette Kienle
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-06-11       Impact factor: 3.134

9.  Cervical spine injuries and flexibilities following axial impact with lateral eccentricity.

Authors:  C Van Toen; J Street; T R Oxland; Peter A Cripton
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2014-10-25       Impact factor: 3.134

10.  Comparative anatomical dimensions of the complete human and porcine spine.

Authors:  Iris Busscher; Joris J W Ploegmakers; Gijsbertus J Verkerke; Albert G Veldhuizen
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2010-02-26       Impact factor: 3.134

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.