Impact of material and morphological parameters on the mechanical response of the lumbar spine – A finite element sensitivity study

Zander, Thomas; Dreischarf, Marcel; Timm, Anne-Katrin; Baumann, W.; Schmidt, Hendrik

doi:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2016.12.014

Cited by 53 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, proportion of annulus and nucleus disc areas remained unchanged when the original FE model was scaled for each individual. Differences in the disc heights also affect model predictions of IDPs …”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 63%

Subject‐specific loads on the lumbar spine in detailed finite element models scaled geometrically and kinematic‐driven by radiography images

Dehghan-Hamani

Arjmand

Shirazi‐Adl

2019

Numer Methods Biomed Eng

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Traditional load‐control musculoskeletal and finite element (FE) models of the spine fail to accurately predict in vivo intervertebral joint loads due mainly to the simplifications and assumptions when estimating redundant trunk muscle forces. An alternative powerful protocol that bypasses the calculation of muscle forces is to drive the detailed FE models by image‐based in vivo displacements. Development of subject‐specific models, however, both involves the risk of extensive radiation exposures while imaging in supine and upright postures and is time consuming in terms of the reconstruction of the vertebrae, discs, ligaments, and facets geometries. This study therefore aimed to introduce a remedy for the development of subject‐specific FE models by scaling the geometry of an existing detailed FE model of the T12‐S1 lumbar spine. Five subject‐specific scaled models were driven by their own radiography image‐based displacements in order to predict joint loads, ligament forces, facet joint forces, and disc fiber strains during relaxed upright as well as moderate flexion and extension tasks. The predicted intradiscal pressures were found in adequate agreement with in vivo data for upright, flexion, and extension tasks. There were however large intersubject variations in the estimated joint loads and facet forces.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 63%

Subject‐specific loads on the lumbar spine in detailed finite element models scaled geometrically and kinematic‐driven by radiography images

Dehghan-Hamani

Arjmand

Shirazi‐Adl

2019

Numer Methods Biomed Eng

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…1). The properties were also adopted from the literature ( Table 1) [10]. The bottom of the L5 vertebral body was fully constrained (Fig.…”

Section: Development Of the Olif Fe Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recently, FEA of lumbar biomechanics had become an important test for the evaluation of surgical feasibility and the design of instruments. [10]. The purpose of this study was to evaluate stability and safety of OLIF surgery with ASF by Finite element analysis (FEA).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biomechanical Evaluation of Anterolateral Screw Fixation for Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion Surgery – A Finite Element Analysis

Fang

Chen

zhuang

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The most common complication of oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) is cage subsidence. OLIF combined with internal fixation could help decrease the cage subsidence and increase the fusion rate. The aim of this study was to evaluate the biomechanical feasibility and safety in the patients undergoing OLIF surgery with anterolateral screw fixation (ASF). Methods: Based on our previous validated model , L4-L5 functional surgical models corresponding to the ASF and Bilateral pedicle screw fixation(BPSF) methods were created. A 500 N compression force was applied to the superior surface of the model to represent the upper body weight, and a 7.5 Nm moment was applied to simulate the six movement directions of the lumbar spinal model: flexion/extension, right/left lateral bending and right/left axial rotation. Finite element (FE) models were developed to compare the biomechanics of the ASF and BPSF groups. Results: Compared to the range of motion (ROM) of the intact lumbar model, that of the ASF model was decreased by 82.0% in flexion, 60.0% in extension, and the BPSF model was decreased by 86.7% in flexion, 77.3% in extension. Compared to the BPSF model, the maximum stresses of the L4 inferior endplate (IEP) and L5 superior endplate (SEP) were greatly increased in the ASF model; The contact surface between vertebrae and screw (CSVS) in the ASF model produced nearly100% more stresses than the BPSF model in all moment .Conclusions: OLIF surgery with ASF could not reduce the maximum stresses on the endplate and CSVS, which may be a potential risk factor for cage subsidence and screw loosening.

show abstract

“…Finite element analysis (FEA) in lumbar biomechanics has become popular in the recent decades, as a complement for the cadaver test [8,9]. FE models of cage and spine were used for the evaluation of surgery feasibility and the design of instruments.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biomechanical comparison of stand-alone and bilateral pedicle screws fixation for oblique lumbar inter-body fusion surgery – a finite element analysis

Fang¹,

Lin²,

cui³

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the biomechanical stability and safety in patients undergoing oblique lumbar inter-body fusion (OLIF) surgery with stand-alone (SA) and Bilateral pedicle screw fixation (BPSF). Methods: A finite element model of L4-L5 spinal unit was established and validated. Based on the validated model technique, function surgical models corresponding to SA, BPSF were created. Simulations employing the models were performed to investigate the OLIF surgery. A bending moment of 7.5 Nm and a 500 N follower load were applied to the models in flexion, extension, axial rotation and lateral bending. Finite element(FE) models were developed to compare the biomechanics of the intact group, SA, BPSF group. Results: Compared with the Range of motion (ROM) of the intact lumbar model, SA model decreased by 79.5% in flexion, 54.2% in extension, BPSF model decreased by 86.4% in flexion, 70.8% in extension. Compared with the BPSF, the maximum stresses of L4 inferior endplate (IEP) and L5 superior endplate (SEP) increased significantly in SA model, L4 IEP increased to 49.7MPa in extension, L5 SEP increased to 47.7MPa in flexion. Conclusions: OLIF surgery with BPSF could reduce the max stresses of the endplate which may reduce cage sedimentation incidence. However, OLIF surgery with SA could not provide enough rigidity for the fusion segment in osteoporosis patients which may increase the cage sedimentation incidence. Keywords: OLIF; Pedicle screw fixation; spinal fusion; finite element

show abstract

Impact of material and morphological parameters on the mechanical response of the lumbar spine – A finite element sensitivity study

Cited by 53 publications

References 28 publications

Subject‐specific loads on the lumbar spine in detailed finite element models scaled geometrically and kinematic‐driven by radiography images

Subject‐specific loads on the lumbar spine in detailed finite element models scaled geometrically and kinematic‐driven by radiography images

Biomechanical Evaluation of Anterolateral Screw Fixation for Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion Surgery – A Finite Element Analysis

Biomechanical comparison of stand-alone and bilateral pedicle screws fixation for oblique lumbar inter-body fusion surgery – a finite element analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About