Literature DB >> 21372650

Validation of a noninvasive technique to precisely measure in vivo three-dimensional cervical spine movement.

William J Anderst1, Emma Baillargeon, William F Donaldson, Joon Y Lee, James D Kang.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: In vivo validation during functional loading.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the accuracy and repeatability of a model-based tracking technique that combines subject-specific computed tomographic (CT) models and high-speed biplane x-ray images to measure three-dimensional (3D) in vivo cervical spine motion. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Accurate 3D spine motion is difficult to obtain in vivo during physiological loading because of the inability to directly attach measurement equipment to individual vertebrae. Previous measurement systems were limited by two-dimensional (2D) results and/or their need for manual identification of anatomical landmarks, precipitating unreliable and inaccurate results. All previous techniques lack the ability to capture true 3D motion during dynamic functional loading.
METHODS: Three subjects had 1.0-mm-diameter tantalum beads implanted into their fused and adjacent vertebrae during anterior cervical discectomy and fusion surgery. High-resolution CT scans were obtained after surgery and used to create subject-specific 3D models of each cervical vertebra. Biplane x-ray images were collected at 30 frames per second while the subjects performed flexion/extension and axial rotation movements 6 months after surgery. Individual bone motion, intervertebral kinematics, and arthrokinematics derived from dynamic radiostereophotogrammetric analysis served as a gold standard to evaluate the accuracy of the model-based tracking technique.
RESULTS: Individual bones were tracked with an average precision of 0.19 and 0.33 mm in nonfused and fused bones, respectively. Precision in measuring 3D joint kinematics in fused and adjacent segments averaged 0.4 mm for translations and 1.1° for rotations, while anterior and posterior disc height above and below the fusion were measured with a precision ranging between 0.2 and 0.4 mm. The variability in 3D joint kinematics associated with tracking the same trial repeatedly was 0.02 mm in translation and 0.06° in rotation.
CONCLUSION: The 3D cervical spine motion can be precisely measured in vivo with submillimeter accuracy during functional loading without the need for bead implantation. Fusion instrumentation did not diminish the accuracy of kinematic and arthrokinematic results. The semiautomated model-based tracking technique has excellent repeatability.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21372650      PMCID: PMC3077907          DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31820b7e2f

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)        ISSN: 0362-2436            Impact factor:   3.468


  23 in total

1.  Validation of a new model-based tracking technique for measuring three-dimensional, in vivo glenohumeral joint kinematics.

Authors:  Michael J Bey; Roger Zauel; Stephanie K Brock; Scott Tashman
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 2.097

Review 2.  Roentgen stereophotogrammetric analysis.

Authors:  G Selvik
Journal:  Acta Radiol       Date:  1990-03       Impact factor: 1.990

Review 3.  Biomechanics of fusion and stabilization.

Authors:  V K Goel; M H Pope
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1995-12-15       Impact factor: 3.468

4.  Functional radiographic diagnosis of the cervical spine: flexion/extension.

Authors:  J Dvorak; D Froehlich; L Penning; H Baumgartner; M M Panjabi
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1988-07       Impact factor: 3.468

5.  Three-dimensional motion analysis of the upper cervical spine during axial rotation.

Authors:  H Iai; H Moriya; S Goto; K Takahashi; M Yamagata; T Tamaki
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1993-12       Impact factor: 3.468

6.  Kinematics of the upper cervical spine in rotation: in vivo three-dimensional analysis.

Authors:  Takahiro Ishii; Yoshihiro Mukai; Noboru Hosono; Hironobu Sakaura; Yoshikazu Nakajima; Yoshinobu Sato; Kazuomi Sugamoto; Hideki Yoshikawa
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2004-04-01       Impact factor: 3.468

7.  Rotation of the cervical spine. A CT study in normal subjects.

Authors:  L Penning; J T Wilmink
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1987-10       Impact factor: 3.468

8.  Kinematics of the cervical spine.

Authors:  S B Dunsker; D P Colley; F H Mayfield
Journal:  Clin Neurosurg       Date:  1978

9.  Cancer risks attributable to low doses of ionizing radiation: assessing what we really know.

Authors:  David J Brenner; Richard Doll; Dudley T Goodhead; Eric J Hall; Charles E Land; John B Little; Jay H Lubin; Dale L Preston; R Julian Preston; Jerome S Puskin; Elaine Ron; Rainer K Sachs; Jonathan M Samet; Richard B Setlow; Marco Zaider
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2003-11-10       Impact factor: 11.205

10.  Changes in segmental intervertebral motion adjacent to cervical arthrodesis: a prospective study.

Authors:  Charles A Reitman; John A Hipp; Lyndon Nguyen; Stephen I Esses
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2004-06-01       Impact factor: 3.468

View more
  30 in total

1.  Quantifying cross-scatter contamination in biplane fluoroscopy motion analysis systems.

Authors:  Janelle A Cross; Ben McHenry; Taly Gilat Schmidt
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2015-10-23

2.  Subject-specific inverse dynamics of the head and cervical spine during in vivo dynamic flexion-extension.

Authors:  William J Anderst; William F Donaldson; Joon Y Lee; James D Kang
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 2.097

3.  Ranges of Cervical Intervertebral Disc Deformation During an In Vivo Dynamic Flexion-Extension of the Neck.

Authors:  Yan Yu; Haiqing Mao; Jing-Sheng Li; Tsung-Yuan Tsai; Liming Cheng; Kirkham B Wood; Guoan Li; Thomas D Cha
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  2017-06-01       Impact factor: 2.097

4.  In vivo validation of patellofemoral kinematics during overground gait and stair ascent.

Authors:  Samuel Pitcairn; Bryson Lesniak; William Anderst
Journal:  Gait Posture       Date:  2018-06-18       Impact factor: 2.840

5.  Continuous cervical spine kinematics during in vivo dynamic flexion-extension.

Authors:  William J Anderst; William F Donaldson; Joon Y Lee; James D Kang
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2013-11-07       Impact factor: 4.166

6.  Motion path of the instant center of rotation in the cervical spine during in vivo dynamic flexion-extension: implications for artificial disc design and evaluation of motion quality after arthrodesis.

Authors:  William Anderst; Emma Baillargeon; William Donaldson; Joon Lee; James Kang
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2013-05-01       Impact factor: 3.468

7.  Sensitivity, reliability and accuracy of the instant center of rotation calculation in the cervical spine during in vivo dynamic flexion-extension.

Authors:  Emma Baillargeon; William J Anderst
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2013-01-12       Impact factor: 2.712

8.  Micro-computed tomography-based three-dimensional kinematic analysis during lateral bending for spinal fusion assessment in a rat posterolateral lumbar fusion model.

Authors:  Tomonori Yamaguchi; Nozomu Inoue; Robert L Sah; Yu-Po Lee; Alexander P Taborek; Gregory M Williams; Timothy A Moseley; Won C Bae; Koichi Masuda
Journal:  Tissue Eng Part C Methods       Date:  2014-01-09       Impact factor: 3.056

9.  Cervical motion segment percent contributions to flexion-extension during continuous functional movement in control subjects and arthrodesis patients.

Authors:  William J Anderst; William F Donaldson; Joon Y Lee; James D Kang
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2013-04-20       Impact factor: 3.468

10.  Cervical disc deformation during flexion-extension in asymptomatic controls and single-level arthrodesis patients.

Authors:  William Anderst; William Donaldson; Joon Lee; James Kang
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  2013-07-17       Impact factor: 3.494

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.