Literature DB >> 2395361

Mechanical function of the human lumbar interspinous and supraspinous ligaments.

R J Hindle1, M J Pearcy, A Cross.   

Abstract

The mechanical function of the interspinous and supraspinous ligaments has been examined by simulating, on excised specimens, the deformation caused during forward flexion of the spine in real life. The load extension curves showed that during the first half of flexion the ligaments carried very little load but towards the end of the range of flexion they resisted up to 134N. When the supraspinous ligament was sectioned the interspinous ligament alone resisted 75% of this load. Testing at high strain rates showed an increase in load-carrying capacity of up to 30%. The maximum extension moment that can be produced by these ligaments was calculated to be approximately 7 Nm, or 5% of the moment the back muscles can produce across any intervertebral joint. Hence, during active lifting, these ligaments in isolation provide little mechanical assistance.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1990        PMID: 2395361     DOI: 10.1016/0141-5425(90)90010-k

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Biomed Eng        ISSN: 0141-5425


  15 in total

1.  Midterm outcome after unilateral approach for bilateral decompression of lumbar spinal stenosis: 5-year prospective study.

Authors:  Halit Cavuşoğlu; Ramazan Alper Kaya; Osman Nuri Türkmenoglu; Cengiz Tuncer; Ibrahim Colak; Yunus Aydin
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2007-08-22       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Elastic resistance of the spine: Why does motion preservation surgery almost fail?

Authors:  Alessandro Landi
Journal:  World J Clin Cases       Date:  2013-07-16       Impact factor: 1.337

3.  The spatiotemporal development of innervation in spinal ligaments of chickens.

Authors:  H Jiang; M Moreau; N Greidanus; J Bilo; G Russell; J Raso; K Bagnall
Journal:  J Anat       Date:  1996-08       Impact factor: 2.610

Review 4.  A comprehensive review of the sub-axial ligaments of the vertebral column: part I anatomy and function.

Authors:  Asma Mian Butt; Clarence Gill; Amin Demerdash; Koichi Watanabe; Marios Loukas; Curtis J Rozzelle; R Shane Tubbs
Journal:  Childs Nerv Syst       Date:  2015-05-01       Impact factor: 1.475

5.  Interspinous posterior devices: What is the real surgical indication?

Authors:  Alessandro Landi
Journal:  World J Clin Cases       Date:  2014-09-16       Impact factor: 1.337

Review 6.  Effectiveness of posterior decompression techniques compared with conventional laminectomy for lumbar stenosis.

Authors:  Gijsbert Overdevest; Carmen Vleggeert-Lankamp; Wilco Jacobs; Claudius Thomé; Robert Gunzburg; Wilco Peul
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-07-17       Impact factor: 3.134

7.  Finite element analysis for comparison of spinous process osteotomies technique with conventional laminectomy as lumbar decompression procedure.

Authors:  Ho-Joong Kim; Heoung-Jae Chun; Kyoung-Tak Kang; Hwan-Mo Lee; Bong-Soon Chang; Choon-Ki Lee; Jin-S Yeom
Journal:  Yonsei Med J       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 2.759

8.  Spinal canal morphology and clinical outcomes of microsurgical bilateral decompression via a unilateral approach for lumbar spinal canal stenosis.

Authors:  Won-Seok Choi; Chang Hyun Oh; Gyu Yeul Ji; Sung Chan Shin; Jang-Bo Lee; Dong-Hyuk Park; Tai-Hyoung Cho
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2013-12-01       Impact factor: 3.134

9.  Alteration in global motor strategy following lateral ankle sprain.

Authors:  Maude Bastien; Hélène Moffet; Laurent J Bouyer; Marc Perron; Luc J Hébert; Jean Leblond
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2014-12-16       Impact factor: 2.362

10.  The microendoscopic decompression of lumbar stenosis: a review of the current literature and clinical results.

Authors:  Albert P Wong; Zachary A Smith; Rohan R Lall; Lacey E Bresnahan; Richard G Fessler
Journal:  Minim Invasive Surg       Date:  2012-07-31
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.