Literature DB >> 9879095

Cervical spine models for biomechanical research.

M M Panjabi1.   

Abstract

Biomechanical models have been used for the understanding of the basic normal function and dysfunction of the cervical spine and for testing implants and devices. Biomechanical models can be broadly categorized into four groups: 1) Physical models, made of nonanatomic material (e.g., plastic blocks), are often used for the testing of spinal instrumentation when only the device is to be evaluated. 2) In vitro models consisting of a cadaveric spine specimen are useful in providing basic understanding of the functioning of the spine. Human specimens are more suitable for these models than are animal specimens whenever anatomy, size (for instrumentation), and kinematics are important. Animal specimens are less costly, easier to obtain, and often have less variability but should be used with care because of the absence of anatomic fidelity with the human. 3) In vivo animal models provide the means to model living phenomena, such as fusion, development of disc degeneration, instability, and adaptive responses in segments adjacent to spinal instrumentation. Choosing the appropriate animal is important. The appropriate animal should have spinal loading, kinematics, kinetics, vertebral size, and healing-fusion rates as similar to those in humans as possible. For better interpretation of in vivo animal experimental results, in vitro biomechanical study using the same animal cadaveric specimen is useful but has not been used routinely. 4) Computer models are developed from mathematical equations that incorporate geometry and physical characteristics of the human spine and may be advantageously used for problems that are difficult to model by other means. Examples are the changes in disc and vertebral stresses in response to graded transection of facet joints and the study of changes in endplate loading caused by disc degeneration. Because these models are purely mathematical, their validation is essential. Validation is best achieved by first incorporating high-quality geometry and physical characteristics of the human spine and then comparing the model predictions with experimental observations. Sometimes an enthusiastic researcher may use a computer model beyond its validation boundary, making the model's predictions unreliable. In general, it is important to remember that a biomechanical model, similar to any other model, represents only a certain aspect of the real living human being. The aspect chosen for representation should be selected with great care. The model should be designed to answer specifically the question asked. Its predictions are valid only within the boundaries of assumptions and limitations that it incorporates.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9879095     DOI: 10.1097/00007632-199812150-00007

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


  14 in total

1.  Biomechanical analysis of anterior cervical spine plate fixation systems with unicortical and bicortical screw purchase.

Authors:  Wolfgang Lehmann; Michael Blauth; Daniel Briem; Ulf Schmidt
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2003-12-17       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Biomechanical comparison of anterior cervical spine locked and unlocked plate-fixation systems.

Authors:  Wolfgang Lehmann; Daniel Briem; Michael Blauth; Ulf Schmidt
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2004-06-10       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Benefits of spine stabilization with biodegradable scaffolds in spinal cord injured rats.

Authors:  Nuno A Silva; Rui A Sousa; Joana S Fraga; Marco Fontes; Hugo Leite-Almeida; Rui Cerqueira; Armando Almeida; Nuno Sousa; Rui L Reis; Antonio J Salgado
Journal:  Tissue Eng Part C Methods       Date:  2012-08-20       Impact factor: 3.056

4.  Biofidelic whole cervical spine model with muscle force replication for whiplash simulation.

Authors:  P C Ivancic; Manohar M Panjabi; S Ito; P A Cripton; J L Wang
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2004-10-12       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  Evaluation of biomechanical properties of anterior atlantoaxial transarticular locking plate system using three-dimensional finite element analysis.

Authors:  Xian-hua Cai; Zhi-chao Liu; Yang Yu; Mei-chao Zhang; Wei-bing Huang
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2013-07-03       Impact factor: 3.134

6.  Simulated whiplash modulates expression of the glutamatergic system in the spinal cord suggesting spinal plasticity is associated with painful dynamic cervical facet loading.

Authors:  Ling Dong; Beth A Winkelstein
Journal:  J Neurotrauma       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 5.269

7.  Spontaneous age-related cervical disc degeneration in the sand rat.

Authors:  Helen E Gruber; Ryan Phillips; Jane A Ingram; H James Norton; Edward N Hanley
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2014-02-11       Impact factor: 4.176

8.  Influences of different lower cervical bone graft heights on the size of the intervertebral foramen: multiple planar dynamic measurements with laser scanning.

Authors:  Rui Yang; Mengjun Ma; Lin Huang; Jichao Ye; Yong Tang; Peng Wang; Dezhen Yin; Keng Chen; Weiping Li; Huiyong Shen
Journal:  Lasers Med Sci       Date:  2018-01-30       Impact factor: 3.161

9.  Design a novel integrated screw for minimally invasive atlantoaxial anterior transarticular screw fixation: a finite element analysis.

Authors:  Yingkai Zhang; Cheng Li; Lei Li; Yanyan Sun; Zeqing Li; Yunli Mei; Xinyuan Feng
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2020-07-06       Impact factor: 2.359

10.  Three dimensional finite element analysis used to study the influence of the stress and strain of the operative and adjacent segments through different foraminnoplasty technique in the PELD: Study protocol clinical trial (SPIRIT Compliant).

Authors:  YiZhou Xie; Xinling Wang; Qiang Jian; Xiaohong Fan; Yang Yu; Dangwei Gu; WeiDong Wu
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2020-04       Impact factor: 1.817

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.