Background: Bone metastases may lead to spine instability and increase the risk of fracture. Scoring systems are available to assess critical metastases, but they lack specificity, and provide uncertain indications over a wide range, where most cases fall. The aim of this work was to use a novel biomechanical approach to evaluate the effect of lesion type, size, and location on the deformation of the metastatic vertebra. Method: Vertebrae with metastases were identified from 16 human spines from a donation programme. The size and position of the metastases, and the Spine Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS) were evaluated from clinical Quantitative Computed Tomography images. Thirty-five spine segments consisting of metastatic vertebrae and adjacent healthy controls were biomechanically tested in four different loading conditions. The strain distribution over the entire vertebral bodies was measured with Digital Image Correlation. Correlations between the features of the metastasis (type, size, position and SINS) and the deformation of the metastatic vertebrae were statistically explored. Results: The metastatic type (lytic, blastic, mixed) characterizes the vertebral behaviour (Kruskal-Wallis, p = 0.04). In fact, the lytic metastases showed more critical deformation compared to the control vertebrae (average: 2-fold increase, with peaks of 14-fold increase). By contrast, the vertebrae with mixed or blastic metastases did not show a clear trend, with deformations similar or lower than the controls. Once the position of the lytic lesion with respect to the loading direction was taken into account, the size of the lesion was significantly correlated with the perturbation to the strain distribution (r 2 = 0.72, p < 0.001). Conversely, the SINS poorly correlated with the mechanical evidence, and only in case of lytic lesions (r 2 = 0.25, p < 0.0001). Conclusion: These results highlight the relevance of the size and location of the lytic lesion, which are marginally considered in the current clinical scoring systems, in driving the spinal biomechanical instability. The strong correlation with the biomechanical evidence indicates that these parameters are representative of the mechanical competence of the vertebra. The improved explanatory power compared to the SINS suggests including them in future guidelines for the clinical practice.

The mechanical consequences of osteophytes are not completely clear. We aimed to understand whether and how the presence of an osteophyte perturbs strain distribution in the neighboring bone. The scope of this study was to evaluate the mechanical behavior induced by the osteophytes using full-field surface strain analysis in different loading configurations. Eight thoracolumbar segments, containing a vertebra with an osteophyte and an adjacent vertebra without an osteophyte (control), were harvested from six human spines. The position and size of the osteophytes were evaluated using clinical computed tomography imaging. The spine segments were biomechanically tested in the elastic regime in different loading configurations while the strains over the frontal and lateral surface of vertebral bodies were measured using digital image correlation. The strain fields in the vertebrae with and without osteophytes were compared. The correlation between osteophyte size and strain alteration was explored. The strain fields measured in the vertebrae with osteophytes were different from the control ones. In pure compression, we observed a mild trend between the size of the osteophyte and the strain distribution (R2 = 0.32, p = 0.15). A slightly stronger trend was found for bending (R2 = 0.44, p = 0.075). This study suggests that the osteophytes visibly perturb the strain field in the nearby vertebral area. However, the effect on the surrounding bone is not consistent. Indeed, in some cases the osteophyte shielded the neighboring bone, and in other cases, the osteophyte increased the strains.

No abstract

No abstract

For the treatment of humeral fractures, numerous strategies exist to improve the clinical outcome of the reconstruction and to reduce the incidence of fixation failure. Injection of acrylic-based cements to reinforce the bone and/or augment the screws is one option. The heat generated during cement polymerization raises some concerns, as it could cause tissue damage. The first aim of this study was to measure the temperature over time during polymerization when acrylic cements are delivered inside the bone to treat fracture. The second aim was to assess if the ISO-5833:2002 standard can predict what happens in a real bone. Different tests were performed using two acrylic-based cements (Mendec and Cal-Cemex): (i) the ISO-5833:2002 standard (Annex C); (ii) tests on human bones (humeral diaphysis and humeral head) injected with cement to simulate fracture treatment. In the humeri, the highest temperature was measured in the diaphysis (68.6∘C for Mendec, 62.7∘C for Cal-Cemex). These values are comparable with the temperature reached in other consolidated applications (vertebroplasty). Exposure to high temperature was shorter for the diaphysis than for the head. For both cements, in both the diaphysis and the head, temperatures exceeded 48∘C for less than 10[Formula: see text]min. This is within the threshold for tissue necrosis. The ISO-5833:2002 yielded significantly different results in terms of maximum temperature (difference exceeding 15∘C) and exposure to temperature above 48∘C and 45∘C. This discrepancy is probably due to a combination of factors affecting the amount of heat produced and dissipated (e.g., amount and shape of the cement, thermal conductivity).