Literature DB >> 28092118

Incorporation of CT-based measurements of trunk anatomy into subject-specific musculoskeletal models of the spine influences vertebral loading predictions.

Alexander G Bruno1,2, Hossein Mokhtarzadeh2,3, Brett T Allaire2, Kelsey R Velie2, M Clara De Paolis Kaluza2, Dennis E Anderson2,3, Mary L Bouxsein1,2,3.   

Abstract

We created subject-specific musculoskeletal models of the thoracolumbar spine by incorporating spine curvature and muscle morphology measurements from computed tomography (CT) scans to determine the degree to which vertebral compressive and shear loading estimates are sensitive to variations in trunk anatomy. We measured spine curvature and trunk muscle morphology using spine CT scans of 125 men, and then created four different thoracolumbar spine models for each person: (i) height and weight adjusted (Ht/Wt models); (ii) height, weight, and spine curvature adjusted (+C models); (iii) height, weight, and muscle morphology adjusted (+M models); and (iv) height, weight, spine curvature, and muscle morphology adjusted (+CM models). We determined vertebral compressive and shear loading at three regions of the spine (T8, T12, and L3) for four different activities. Vertebral compressive loads predicted by the subject-specific CT-based musculoskeletal models were between 54% lower to 45% higher from those estimated using musculoskeletal models adjusted only for subject height and weight. The impact of subject-specific information on vertebral loading estimates varied with the activity and spinal region. Vertebral loading estimates were more sensitive to incorporation of subject-specific spinal curvature than subject-specific muscle morphology. Our results indicate that individual variations in spine curvature and trunk muscle morphology can have a major impact on estimated vertebral compressive and shear loads, and thus should be accounted for when estimating subject-specific vertebral loading.
© 2017 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Orthop Res 35:2164-2173, 2017. © 2017 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  musculoskeletal model; spine curvature; subject-specific; trunk muscle morphology; vertebral loading

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28092118      PMCID: PMC5511782          DOI: 10.1002/jor.23524

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Orthop Res        ISSN: 0736-0266            Impact factor:   3.494


  34 in total

Review 1.  Neutral upright sagittal spinal alignment from the occiput to the pelvis in asymptomatic adults: a review and resynthesis of the literature.

Authors:  Charles Kuntz; Linda S Levin; Stephen L Ondra; Christopher I Shaffrey; Chad J Morgan
Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine       Date:  2007-02

2.  Quantification of age-related shape change of the human rib cage through geometric morphometrics.

Authors:  Francis S Gayzik; Mao M Yu; Kerry A Danelson; Dennis E Slice; Joel D Stitzel
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2008-04-01       Impact factor: 2.712

3.  The effect of osteoporotic vertebral fracture on predicted spinal loads in vivo.

Authors:  Andrew M Briggs; Tim V Wrigley; Jaap H van Dieën; Bev Phillips; Sing Kai Lo; Alison M Greig; Kim L Bennell
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2006-07-04       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  Effect of body weight on spinal loads in various activities: a personalized biomechanical modeling approach.

Authors:  M Hajihosseinali; N Arjmand; A Shirazi-Adl
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2014-11-29       Impact factor: 2.712

5.  Subject-specific biomechanics of trunk: musculoskeletal scaling, internal loads and intradiscal pressure estimation.

Authors:  F Ghezelbash; A Shirazi-Adl; N Arjmand; Z El-Ouaaid; A Plamondon
Journal:  Biomech Model Mechanobiol       Date:  2016-05-12

6.  The Third Generation Cohort of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute's Framingham Heart Study: design, recruitment, and initial examination.

Authors:  Greta Lee Splansky; Diane Corey; Qiong Yang; Larry D Atwood; L Adrienne Cupples; Emelia J Benjamin; Ralph B D'Agostino; Caroline S Fox; Martin G Larson; Joanne M Murabito; Christopher J O'Donnell; Ramachandran S Vasan; Philip A Wolf; Daniel Levy
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2007-03-19       Impact factor: 4.897

7.  Practical approach to subject-specific estimation of knee joint contact force.

Authors:  Brian A Knarr; Jill S Higginson
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2015-04-22       Impact factor: 2.712

8.  Thoracic kyphosis affects spinal loads and trunk muscle force.

Authors:  Andrew M Briggs; Jaap H van Dieën; Tim V Wrigley; Alison M Greig; Bev Phillips; Sing Kai Lo; Kim L Bennell
Journal:  Phys Ther       Date:  2007-05

9.  Defining normal distributions of coronary artery calcium in women and men (from the Framingham Heart Study).

Authors:  Udo Hoffmann; Joseph M Massaro; Caroline S Fox; Emily Manders; Christopher J O'Donnell
Journal:  Am J Cardiol       Date:  2008-08-20       Impact factor: 2.778

10.  The effect of thoracic kyphosis and sagittal plane alignment on vertebral compressive loading.

Authors:  Alexander G Bruno; Dennis E Anderson; John D'Agostino; Mary L Bouxsein
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 6.741

View more
  7 in total

1.  Musculoskeletal full-body models including a detailed thoracolumbar spine for children and adolescents aged 6-18 years.

Authors:  Stefan Schmid; Katelyn A Burkhart; Brett T Allaire; Daniel Grindle; Dennis E Anderson
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2019-08-07       Impact factor: 2.712

2.  Estimating apparent maximum muscle stress of trunk extensor muscles in older adults using subject-specific musculoskeletal models.

Authors:  Katelyn A Burkhart; Alexander G Bruno; Mary L Bouxsein; Jonathan F Bean; Dennis E Anderson
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  2017-06-28       Impact factor: 3.494

Review 3.  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

4.  Patterns of Load-to-Strength Ratios Along the Spine in a Population-Based Cohort to Evaluate the Contribution of Spinal Loading to Vertebral Fractures.

Authors:  Hossein Mokhtarzadeh; Dennis E Anderson; Brett T Allaire; Mary L Bouxsein
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2020-12-13       Impact factor: 6.741

5.  Validation of a Patient-Specific Musculoskeletal Model for Lumbar Load Estimation Generated by an Automated Pipeline From Whole Body CT.

Authors:  Tanja Lerchl; Malek El Husseini; Amirhossein Bayat; Anjany Sekuboyina; Luis Hermann; Kati Nispel; Thomas Baum; Maximilian T Löffler; Veit Senner; Jan S Kirschke
Journal:  Front Bioeng Biotechnol       Date:  2022-07-11

6.  Evaluation of Load-To-Strength Ratios in Metastatic Vertebrae and Comparison With Age- and Sex-Matched Healthy Individuals.

Authors:  Dennis E Anderson; Michael W Groff; Thomas F Flood; Brett T Allaire; Roger B Davis; Marc A Stadelmann; Philippe K Zysset; Ron N Alkalay
Journal:  Front Bioeng Biotechnol       Date:  2022-08-05

7.  Load Distribution in the Lumbar Spine During Modeled Compression Depends on Lordosis.

Authors:  Andreas Müller; Robert Rockenfeller; Nicolas Damm; Michael Kosterhon; Sven R Kantelhardt; Ameet K Aiyangar; Karin Gruber
Journal:  Front Bioeng Biotechnol       Date:  2021-06-10
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.