Biomechanical investigation of thoracolumbar spine in different postures during ejection using a combined finite element and multi‐body approach

Du, Chengbin; Mo, Zhongjun; Tian, Sugui; Wang, Lizhen; Fan, Jie; Liu, Songyang; Fan, Yubo

doi:10.1002/cnm.2647

Cited by 60 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A previously validated 3-dimensional intact lumbar (INT) FE model (L1–S1) was used [12]. The commercial finite element program package (Abaqus 6.11; Dassault Systèmes Simulia Corporation, France) was used to model the spinal segments.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The spinal vertebrae and intervertebral discs were modeled as 8-node, 3-dimensional solid elements. The annulus ground substance and nucleus pulposus were simulated to be nearly incompressible and hyper-elastic [12, 13]. The spinal ligaments and annulus fibers of discs were modeled as tension-only springs with nonlinear properties taken from the literature [13].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Preserving Posterior Complex Can Prevent Adjacent Segment Disease following Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Surgeries: A Finite Element Analysis

Huang

Cheng³

et al. 2016

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveTo investigate the biomechanical effects of the lumbar posterior complex on the adjacent segments after posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) surgeries.MethodsA finite element model of the L1–S1 segment was modified to simulate PLIF with total laminectomy (PLIF-LAM) and PLIF with hemilaminectomy (PLIF-HEMI) procedures. The models were subjected to a 400N follower load with a 7.5-N.m moment of flexion, extension, torsion, and lateral bending. The range of motion (ROM), intradiscal pressure (IDP), and ligament force were compared.ResultsIn Flexion, the ROM, IDP and ligament force of posterior longitudinal ligament, intertransverse ligament, and capsular ligament remarkably increased at the proximal adjacent segment in the PLIF-LAM model, and slightly increased in the PLIF-HEMI model. There was almost no difference for the ROM, IDP and ligament force at L5-S1 level between the two PLIF models although the ligament forces of ligamenta flava remarkably increased compared with the intact lumbar spine (INT) model. For the other loading conditions, these two models almost showed no difference in ROM, IDP and ligament force on the adjacent discs.ConclusionsPreserved posterior complex acts as the posterior tension band during PLIF surgery and results in less ROM, IDP and ligament forces on the proximal adjacent segment in flexion. Preserving the posterior complex during decompression can be effective on preventing adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) following PLIF surgeries.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Preserving Posterior Complex Can Prevent Adjacent Segment Disease following Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Surgeries: A Finite Element Analysis

Huang

Cheng³

et al. 2016

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Many investigations used FE models, lumped parameters or multibody models, and artificial neural network models to study biodynamic characteristics of the human spine. Kitazaki and Griffin proposed a FE model of the entire human spine to perform a modal analysis.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Human body modeling method to simulate the biodynamic characteristics of spine in vivo with different sitting postures

Dong

Guo

2017

Numer Methods Biomed Eng

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study is to model the computational model of seated whole human body including skeleton, muscle, viscera, ligament, intervertebral disc, and skin to predict effect of the factors (sitting postures, muscle and skin, buttocks, viscera, arms, gravity, and boundary conditions) on the biodynamic characteristics of spine. Two finite element models of seated whole body and a large number of finite element models of different ligamentous motion segments were developed and validated. Static, modal, and transient dynamic analyses were performed. The predicted vertical resonant frequency of seated body model was in the range of vertical natural frequency of 4 to 7 Hz. Muscle, buttocks, viscera, and the boundary conditions of buttocks have influence on the vertical resonant frequency of spine. Muscle played a very important role in biodynamic response of spine. Compared with the vertical posture, the posture of lean forward or backward led to an increase in stress on anterior or lateral posterior of lumbar intervertebral discs. This indicated that keeping correct posture could reduce the injury of vibration on lumbar intervertebral disc under whole-body vibration. The driving posture not only reduced the load of spine but also increased the resonant frequency of spine.

show abstract

“…3,4 In addition, integrating an occupant HBM with a vehicle model may require considering different positions of the HBMs compared to the standardized positions of the models. [8][9][10] This implies that repositioning of body regions or the entire HBM may be required for analysis of different impact scenarios; however, in current methods the focus has been on retaining mesh quality, while the stresses and strains generated within the tissues from repositioning are not included in subsequent impact analyses.Studies have been undertaken regarding repositioning techniques for finite element HBM, and most have focused on producing anatomically correct postures for the models while retaining finite element mesh quality. [11][12][13][14][15][16] During repositioning, the original configuration of the HBM (eg, seated driving position or neutral posture) are morphed into desired configurations (eg, nonneutral postures such as a head-turned posture), which may be necessary for vehicle safety simulations.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

On the importance of retaining stresses and strains in repositioning computational biomechanical models of the cervical spine

Boakye‐Yiadom

Cronin

2017

Numer Methods Biomed Eng

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human body models are created in a specific posture and often repositioned and analyzed without retaining stresses that result from repositioning. For example, repositioning a human neck model within the physiological range of motion to a head-turned posture prior to an impact results in initial stresses within the tissues distracted from their neutral position. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of repositioning on the subsequent kinetics, kinematics, and failure modes, of a lower cervical spine motion segment, to support future research at the full neck level. Repositioning was investigated for 3 modes (tension, flexion, and extension) and 3 load cases. The model was repositioned and loaded to failure in one continuous load history (case 1), or repositioned then restarted with retained stresses and loaded to failure (case 2). In case 3, the model was repositioned and then restarted in a stress-free state, representing current repositioning methods. Not retaining the repositioning stresses and strains resulted in different kinetics, kinematics, or failure modes, depending on the mode of loading. For the motion segment model, the differences were associated with the intervertebral disc fiber reorientation and load distribution, because the disc underwent the largest deformation during repositioning. This study demonstrated that repositioning led to altered response and tissue failure, which is critical for computational models intended to predict injury at the tissue level. It is recommended that stresses and strains be included and retained for subsequent analysis when repositioning a human computational neck model. | INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUNDRecently, extensive efforts are being made with automotive crash simulations and computational models to address occupant safety challenges, such as out-of-position scenarios, using advanced finite element human body models (HBM). [1][2][3][4] These models incorporate representations of soft and hard tissues including bones surrounded by muscles, tendons, and ligaments such as the total human model for safety, human models for safety (HUMOS2), and the HBMs developed by the global human Received: 20 September 2016 Revised: 29 May body models consortium (GHBMC). [5][6][7] Although these HBMs have demonstrated new potential to evaluate injuries at the tissue level, they are often created in a specific position such as a seated driving posture and therefore must be morphed or repositioned to other important postures such as standing in the case of a pedestrian, or may be repositioned to investigate postural effects for specific body regions such as the neck or thorax. 3,4 In addition, integrating an occupant HBM with a vehicle model may require considering different positions of the HBMs compared to the standardized positions of the models. [8][9][10] This implies that repositioning of body regions or the entire HBM may be required for analysis of different impact scenarios; however, in current methods the focus has been on retaining mesh quality,...

show abstract

Biomechanical investigation of thoracolumbar spine in different postures during ejection using a combined finite element and multi‐body approach

Cited by 60 publications

References 37 publications

Preserving Posterior Complex Can Prevent Adjacent Segment Disease following Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Surgeries: A Finite Element Analysis

Preserving Posterior Complex Can Prevent Adjacent Segment Disease following Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Surgeries: A Finite Element Analysis

Human body modeling method to simulate the biodynamic characteristics of spine in vivo with different sitting postures

On the importance of retaining stresses and strains in repositioning computational biomechanical models of the cervical spine

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About