Literature DB >> 16819622

The effect of osteoporotic vertebral fracture on predicted spinal loads in vivo.

Andrew M Briggs1, Tim V Wrigley, Jaap H van Dieën, Bev Phillips, Sing Kai Lo, Alison M Greig, Kim L Bennell.   

Abstract

The aetiology of osteoporotic vertebral fractures is multi-factorial, and cannot be explained solely by low bone mass. After sustaining an initial vertebral fracture, the risk of subsequent fracture increases greatly. Examination of physiologic loads imposed on vertebral bodies may help to explain a mechanism underlying this fracture cascade. This study tested the hypothesis that model-derived segmental vertebral loading is greater in individuals who have sustained an osteoporotic vertebral fracture compared to those with osteoporosis and no history of fracture. Flexion moments, and compression and shear loads were calculated from T2 to L5 in 12 participants with fractures (66.4 +/- 6.4 years, 162.2 +/- 5.1 cm, 69.1 +/- 11.2 kg) and 19 without fractures (62.9 +/- 7.9 years, 158.3 +/- 4.4 cm, 59.3 +/- 8.9 kg) while standing. Static analysis was used to solve gravitational loads while muscle-derived forces were calculated using a detailed trunk muscle model driven by optimization with a cost function set to minimise muscle fatigue. Least squares regression was used to derive polynomial functions to describe normalised load profiles. Regression co-efficients were compared between groups to examine differences in loading profiles. Loading at the fractured level, and at one level above and below, were also compared between groups. The fracture group had significantly greater normalised compression (p = 0.0008) and shear force (p < 0.0001) profiles and a trend for a greater flexion moment profile. At the level of fracture, a significantly greater flexion moment (p = 0.001) and shear force (p < 0.001) was observed in the fracture group. A greater flexion moment (p = 0.003) and compression force (p = 0.007) one level below the fracture, and a greater flexion moment (p = 0.002) and shear force (p = 0.002) one level above the fracture was observed in the fracture group. The differences observed in multi-level spinal loading between the groups may explain a mechanism for increased risk of subsequent vertebral fractures. Interventions aimed at restoring vertebral morphology or reduce thoracic curvature may assist in normalising spine load profiles.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16819622     DOI: 10.1007/s00586-006-0158-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Spine J        ISSN: 0940-6719            Impact factor:   3.134


  44 in total

1.  Incorporation of spinal flexibility measurements into finite element analysis.

Authors:  M G Gardner-Morse; J P Laible; I A Stokes
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  1990-11       Impact factor: 2.097

2.  Lumbar vertebral body compressive strength evaluated by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, quantitative computed tomography, and ashing.

Authors:  E N Ebbesen; J S Thomsen; H Beck-Nielsen; H J Nepper-Rasmussen; L Mosekilde
Journal:  Bone       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 4.398

3.  Muscle activity, internal loads, and stability of the human spine in standing postures: combined model and in vivo studies.

Authors:  Marwan El-Rich; Aboulfazl Shirazi-Adl; Navid Arjmand
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2004-12-01       Impact factor: 3.468

4.  Effects of antagonistic co-contraction on differences between electromyography based and optimization based estimates of spinal forces.

Authors:  J H van Dieën; I Kingma
Journal:  Ergonomics       Date:  2005-03-15       Impact factor: 2.778

5.  In-vitro relationships between vertebral body density, size, and compressive strength the elderly thoracolumbar spine.

Authors:  S J Edmondston; K P Singer; R E Day; P D Breidahl; R I Price
Journal:  Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)       Date:  1994-05       Impact factor: 2.063

6.  The dependence of shear failure properties of trabecular bone on apparent density and trabecular orientation.

Authors:  C M Ford; T M Keaveny
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  1996-10       Impact factor: 2.712

Review 7.  Assessing the risk of vertebral osteoporosis.

Authors:  J A Kanis
Journal:  Singapore Med J       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 1.858

8.  Pre-existing fractures and bone mass predict vertebral fracture incidence in women.

Authors:  P D Ross; J W Davis; R S Epstein; R D Wasnich
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1991-06-01       Impact factor: 25.391

9.  Distribution of mass to the segments of elderly males and females.

Authors:  R K Jensen; P Fletcher
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  1994-01       Impact factor: 2.712

10.  The osteoporotic vertebral structure is well adapted to the loads of daily life, but not to infrequent "error" loads.

Authors:  J Homminga; B Van-Rietbergen; E M Lochmüller; H Weinans; F Eckstein; R Huiskes
Journal:  Bone       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 4.398

View more
  38 in total

Review 1.  The vertebral fracture cascade in osteoporosis: a review of aetiopathogenesis.

Authors:  A M Briggs; A M Greig; J D Wark
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2007-01-06       Impact factor: 4.507

2.  Paraspinal muscle control in people with osteoporotic vertebral fracture.

Authors:  Andrew M Briggs; Alison M Greig; Kim L Bennell; Paul W Hodges
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2007-01-03       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Development and Validation of a Musculoskeletal Model of the Fully Articulated Thoracolumbar Spine and Rib Cage.

Authors:  Alexander G Bruno; Mary L Bouxsein; Dennis E Anderson
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  2015-06-09       Impact factor: 2.097

4.  The influence of spinal fusion length on proximal junction biomechanics: a parametric computational study.

Authors:  Dominika Ignasiak; Tobias Peteler; Tamás F Fekete; Daniel Haschtmann; Stephen J Ferguson
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2018-07-23       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  The effect of muscle ageing and sarcopenia on spinal segmental loads.

Authors:  Dominika Ignasiak; Waldo Valenzuela; Mauricio Reyes; Stephen J Ferguson
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2018-08-28       Impact factor: 3.134

6.  Vertebral deformity arising from an accelerated "creep" mechanism.

Authors:  Jin Luo; Phillip Pollintine; Edward Gomm; Patricia Dolan; Michael A Adams
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2012-03-25       Impact factor: 3.134

7.  Correlative analyses of isolated upper lumbar disc herniation and adjacent wedge-shaped vertebrae.

Authors:  Jia-Xin Xu; Si-Dong Yang; Bao-Lin Wang; Da-Long Yang; Wen-Yuan Ding; Yong Shen
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med       Date:  2015-01-15

8.  Does spinopelvic alignment affect the union status in thoracolumbar osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture?

Authors:  Akira Iwata; Masahiro Kanayama; Fumihiro Oha; Tomoyuki Hashimoto; Norimasa Iwasaki
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2016-08-30

9.  Effects of an exercise and manual therapy program on physical impairments, function and quality-of-life in people with osteoporotic vertebral fracture: a randomised, single-blind controlled pilot trial.

Authors:  Kim L Bennell; Bernadette Matthews; Alison Greig; Andrew Briggs; Anne Kelly; Margaret Sherburn; Judy Larsen; John Wark
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2010-02-17       Impact factor: 2.362

10.  Vertebroplasty and Kyphoplasty Can Restore Normal Spine Mechanics following Osteoporotic Vertebral Fracture.

Authors:  Jin Luo; Michael A Adams; Patricia Dolan
Journal:  J Osteoporos       Date:  2010-06-20
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.