Literature DB >> 24767702

Comparison of eight published static finite element models of the intact lumbar spine: predictive power of models improves when combined together.

M Dreischarf1, T Zander2, A Shirazi-Adl3, C M Puttlitz4, C J Adam5, C S Chen6, V K Goel7, A Kiapour7, Y H Kim8, K M Labus4, J P Little5, W M Park8, Y H Wang6, H J Wilke9, A Rohlmann2, H Schmidt10.   

Abstract

Finite element (FE) model studies have made important contributions to our understanding of functional biomechanics of the lumbar spine. However, if a model is used to answer clinical and biomechanical questions over a certain population, their inherently large inter-subject variability has to be considered. Current FE model studies, however, generally account only for a single distinct spinal geometry with one set of material properties. This raises questions concerning their predictive power, their range of results and on their agreement with in vitro and in vivo values. Eight well-established FE models of the lumbar spine (L1-5) of different research centers around the globe were subjected to pure and combined loading modes and compared to in vitro and in vivo measurements for intervertebral rotations, disc pressures and facet joint forces. Under pure moment loading, the predicted L1-5 rotations of almost all models fell within the reported in vitro ranges, and their median values differed on average by only 2° for flexion-extension, 1° for lateral bending and 5° for axial rotation. Predicted median facet joint forces and disc pressures were also in good agreement with published median in vitro values. However, the ranges of predictions were larger and exceeded those reported in vitro, especially for the facet joint forces. For all combined loading modes, except for flexion, predicted median segmental intervertebral rotations and disc pressures were in good agreement with measured in vivo values. In light of high inter-subject variability, the generalization of results of a single model to a population remains a concern. This study demonstrated that the pooled median of individual model results, similar to a probabilistic approach, can be used as an improved predictive tool in order to estimate the response of the lumbar spine.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Finite element model; Inter-subject variability; Lumbar spine; Predictive power; Sensitivity; Validation; Verification

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24767702     DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2014.04.002

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


  51 in total

1.  Finite element simulation of articular contact mechanics with quadratic tetrahedral elements.

Authors:  Steve A Maas; Benjamin J Ellis; David S Rawlins; Jeffrey A Weiss
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2016-02-06       Impact factor: 2.712

2.  A database of lumbar spinal mechanical behavior for validation of spinal analytical models.

Authors:  Ian A F Stokes; Mack Gardner-Morse
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2016-02-08       Impact factor: 2.712

Review 3.  Deciphering the "Art" in Modeling and Simulation of the Knee Joint: Overall Strategy.

Authors:  Ahmet Erdemir; Thor F Besier; Jason P Halloran; Carl W Imhauser; Peter J Laz; Tina M Morrison; Kevin B Shelburne
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  2019-07-01       Impact factor: 2.097

4.  Prediction of complications and fusion outcomes of fused lumbar spine with or without fixation system under whole-body vibration.

Authors:  Qing-Dong Wang; Li-Xin Guo
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2021-06-02       Impact factor: 2.602

5.  Measurement of range of motions of L3-L4 healthy spine through offsetting reflective markers and in silico analysis of meshed model.

Authors:  G Kosalishkwaran; S Parasuraman; D Kingsly Jeba Singh; Elango Natarajan; I Elamvazuthi; John George
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2019-08-23       Impact factor: 2.602

6.  The examination of stress shielding in a finite element lumbar spine inclusive of the thoracolumbar fascia.

Authors:  Emily Newell; Mark Driscoll
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2021-07-17       Impact factor: 2.602

7.  Lumbar model generator: a tool for the automated generation of a parametric scalable model of the lumbar spine.

Authors:  C E Lavecchia; D M Espino; K M Moerman; K M Tse; D Robinson; P V S Lee; D E T Shepherd
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2018-01       Impact factor: 4.118

Review 8.  Moment-rotation behavior of intervertebral joints in flexion-extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation at all levels of the human spine: A structured review and meta-regression analysis.

Authors:  Chaofei Zhang; Erin M Mannen; Hadley L Sis; Eileen S Cadel; Benjamin M Wong; Wenjun Wang; Bo Cheng; Elizabeth A Friis; Dennis E Anderson
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2019-12-16       Impact factor: 2.712

9.  Effect of screw position on load transfer in lumbar pedicle screws: a non-idealized finite element analysis.

Authors:  Anna G U S Newcomb; Seungwon Baek; Brian P Kelly; Neil R Crawford
Journal:  Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin       Date:  2016-07-25       Impact factor: 1.763

10.  A model-based approach for estimation of changes in lumbar segmental kinematics associated with alterations in trunk muscle forces.

Authors:  Iman Shojaei; Navid Arjmand; Judith R Meakin; Babak Bazrgari
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2017-10-06       Impact factor: 2.712

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.