Literature DB >> 22482664

Effect of the intra-abdominal pressure and the center of segmental body mass on the lumbar spine mechanics - a computational parametric study.

W M Park1, S Wang, Y H Kim, K B Wood, J A Sim, G Li.   

Abstract

Determination of physiological loads in human lumbar spine is critical for understanding the mechanisms of lumbar diseases and for designing surgical treatments. Computational models have been used widely to estimate the physiological loads of the spine during simulated functional activities. However, various assumptions on physiological factors such as the intra-abdominal pressure (IAP), centers of mass (COMs) of the upper body and lumbar segments, and vertebral centers of rotation (CORs) have been made in modeling techniques. Systematic knowledge of how these assumptions will affect the predicted spinal biomechanics is important for improving the simulation accuracy. In this paper, we developed a 3D subject-specific numerical model of the lumbosacral spine including T12 and 90 muscles. The effects of the IAP magnitude and COMs locations on the COR of each motion segment and on the joint/muscle forces were investigated using a global convergence optimization procedure when the subject was in a weight bearing standing position. The data indicated that the line connecting the CORs showed a smaller curvature than the lordosis of the lumbar spine in standing posture when the IAP was 0 kPa and the COMs were 10 mm anterior to the geometric center of the T12 vertebra. Increasing the IAP from 0 kPa to 10 kPa shifted the location of CORs toward the posterior direction (from 1.4 ± 8.9 mm anterior to intervertebral disc (IVD) centers to 40.5 ± 3.1 mm posterior to the IVD centers) and reduced the average joint force (from 0.78 ± 0.11 Body weight (BW) to 0.31 ± 0.07 BW) and overall muscle force (from 349.3 ± 57.7 N to 221.5 ± 84.2 N). Anterior movement of the COMs from -30 mm to 70 mm relative to the geometric center of T12 vertebra caused an anterior shift of the CORs (from 25.1 ± 8.3 mm posterior to IVD centers to 7.8 ± 6.2 mm anterior to IVD centers) and increases of average joint forces (from 0.78 ± 0.1 BW to 0.93 ± 0.1 BW) and muscle force (from 348.9 ± 47.7 N to 452.9 ± 58.6 N). Therefore, it is important to consider the IAP and correct COMs in order to accurately simulate human spine biomechanics. The method and results of this study could be useful for designing prevention strategies of spinal injuries and recurrences, and for enhancing rehabilitation efficiency.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22482664      PMCID: PMC3705896          DOI: 10.1115/1.4005541

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Biomech Eng        ISSN: 0148-0731            Impact factor:   2.097


  47 in total

1.  Intra-abdominal pressure during trunk extension motions.

Authors:  W S Marras; G A Mirka
Journal:  Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)       Date:  1996-07       Impact factor: 2.063

2.  A universal model of the lumbar back muscles in the upright position.

Authors:  N Bogduk; J E Macintosh; M J Pearcy
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1992-08       Impact factor: 3.468

3.  Intra-abdominal pressure increases stiffness of the lumbar spine.

Authors:  Paul W Hodges; A E Martin Eriksson; Debra Shirley; Simon C Gandevia
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 2.712

4.  Determination of trunk muscle forces for flexion and extension by using a validated finite element model of the lumbar spine and measured in vivo data.

Authors:  Antonius Rohlmann; Lars Bauer; Thomas Zander; Georg Bergmann; Hans-Joachim Wilke
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2005-04-26       Impact factor: 2.712

5.  The effect of different design concepts in lumbar total disc arthroplasty on the range of motion, facet joint forces and instantaneous center of rotation of a L4-5 segment.

Authors:  Hendrik Schmidt; Stefan Midderhoff; Kyle Adkins; Hans-Joachim Wilke
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 3.134

6.  The effect of an abdominal belt on trunk muscle activity and intra-abdominal pressure during squat lifts.

Authors:  S M McGill; R W Norman; M T Sharratt
Journal:  Ergonomics       Date:  1990-02       Impact factor: 2.778

7.  Instantaneous axes of rotation of the lumbar intervertebral joints.

Authors:  M J Pearcy; N Bogduk
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1988-09       Impact factor: 3.468

8.  Intra-abdominal pressure and abdominal wall muscular function: Spinal unloading mechanism.

Authors:  Ian A F Stokes; Mack G Gardner-Morse; Sharon M Henry
Journal:  Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)       Date:  2010-07-23       Impact factor: 2.063

9.  Stability of the human spine in neutral postures.

Authors:  A Kiefer; A Shirazi-Adl; M Parnianpour
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  1997       Impact factor: 3.134

10.  Sagittal evaluation of elemental geometrical dimensions of human vertebrae.

Authors:  I Gilad; M Nissan
Journal:  J Anat       Date:  1985-12       Impact factor: 2.610

View more
  3 in total

1.  Sagittal plane rotation center of lower lumbar spine during a dynamic weight-lifting activity.

Authors:  Zhan Liu; Tsung-Yuan Tsai; Shaobai Wang; Minfei Wu; Weiye Zhong; Jing-Sheng Li; Thomas Cha; Kirk Wood; Guoan Li
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2015-12-29       Impact factor: 2.712

2.  In vivo loads in the lumbar L3-4 disc during a weight lifting extension.

Authors:  Shaobai Wang; Won Man Park; Yoon Hyuk Kim; Thomas Cha; Kirkham Wood; Guoan Li
Journal:  Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)       Date:  2013-12-04       Impact factor: 2.063

3.  The Lumbar Lordosis in Males and Females, Revisited.

Authors:  Ori Hay; Gali Dar; Janan Abbas; Dan Stein; Hila May; Youssef Masharawi; Nathan Peled; Israel Hershkovitz
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-08-24       Impact factor: 3.240

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.