Literature DB >> 19433325

Applying a follower load delivers realistic results for simulating standing.

A Rohlmann1, T Zander, M Rao, G Bergmann.   

Abstract

The exact loads acting on the lumbar spine during standing remain hitherto unknown. It is for this reason that different loads are applied in experimental and numerical studies. The aim of this study was to compare intersegmental rotations, intradiscal pressures and facet joint forces for different loading modes simulating standing in order to ascertain, the results for which loading modes are closest to data measured in vivo. A validated osseoligamentous finite element model of the lumbar spine ranging from L1 to the disc L5-S1, was used. Six load application modes were investigated as to how they could simulate standing. This posture was simulated by applying a vertical force of 500 N at the centre of the L1 vertebral endplate with different boundary conditions, by applying a follower load, and by applying upper body weight and muscle forces. The calculated intersegmental rotations and intradiscal pressures were compared to in vivo values. Intersegmental rotations at one level vary by up to 8 degrees for the different loading modes simulating standing. The overall rotation in the lumbar spine varies between 2.2 degrees and 19.5 degrees. With a follower load, the difference to the value measured in vivo is 3.3 degrees. For all other loading cases studied, the difference is greater than 6.6 degrees. Intradiscal pressures vary slightly with the loading mode. Calculated forces in the facet joints vary between 0 and nearly 80 N. Applying a follower load of 500 N is the only loading mode simulating standing for which the calculated values for intervertebral rotations and intradiscal pressures agreed well with in vivo data from literature.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19433325     DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2009.03.048

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


  34 in total

1.  Optimal stiffness of a pedicle-screw-based motion preservation implant for the lumbar spine.

Authors:  Antonius Rohlmann; Thomas Zander; Georg Bergmann; Hadi N Boustani
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-10-20       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  In vitro and in silico investigations of disc nucleus replacement.

Authors:  Sandra Reitmaier; Aboulfazl Shirazi-Adl; Maxim Bashkuev; Hans-Joachim Wilke; Antonio Gloria; Hendrik Schmidt
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2012-02-15       Impact factor: 4.118

3.  Biomechanical modeling of brace treatment of scoliosis: effects of gravitational loads.

Authors:  Julien Clin; Carl-Éric Aubin; Stefan Parent; Hubert Labelle
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2011-02-02       Impact factor: 2.602

4.  Effect of the cord pretension of the Dynesys dynamic stabilisation system on the biomechanics of the lumbar spine: a finite element analysis.

Authors:  Chien-Lin Liu; Zheng-Cheng Zhong; Hung-Wei Hsu; Shih-Liang Shih; Shih-Tien Wang; Chinghua Hung; Chen-Sheng Chen
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-04-27       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  Relevance of using a compressive preload in the cervical spine: an experimental and numerical simulating investigation.

Authors:  Cédric Barrey; Marc-Antoine Rousseau; Sylvain Persohn; Sophie Campana; Gilles Perrin; Wafa Skalli
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2015-04-07

6.  Biomechanical analysis of spino-pelvic postural configurations in spondylolysis subjected to various sport-related dynamic loading conditions.

Authors:  Manon Sterba; Pierre-Jean Arnoux; Hubert Labelle; William C Warner; Carl-Éric Aubin
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2018-06-20       Impact factor: 3.134

7.  A new method to include the gravitational forces in a finite element model of the scoliotic spine.

Authors:  Julien Clin; Carl-Éric Aubin; Nadine Lalonde; Stefan Parent; Hubert Labelle
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2011-07-05       Impact factor: 2.602

8.  Effects of rod stiffness and fusion mass on the adjacent segments after floating mono-segmental fusion: a study using finite element analysis.

Authors:  Yong Jun Jin; Young Eun Kim; Jung Ho Seo; Hae Won Choi; Tae-Ahn Jahng
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2012-12-16       Impact factor: 3.134

9.  Pedicle screw fixation with kyphoplasty decreases the fracture risk of the treated and adjacent non-treated vertebral bodies: a finite element analysis.

Authors:  Pan Yang; Ying Zhang; Huan-Wen Ding; Jian Liu; Lin-Qiang Ye; Jin Xiao; Qiang Tu; Tao Yang; Fei Wang; Guo-Gang Sun
Journal:  J Huazhong Univ Sci Technolog Med Sci       Date:  2016-12-07

10.  Biomechanics of sacropelvic fixation: a comprehensive finite element comparison of three techniques.

Authors:  Fabio Galbusera; Gloria Casaroli; Ruchi Chande; Derek Lindsey; Tomaso Villa; Scott Yerby; Ali Mesiwala; Matteo Panico; Enrico Gallazzi; Marco Brayda-Bruno
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2019-11-26       Impact factor: 3.134

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.