Measurement of range of motions of L3-L4 healthy spine through offsetting reflective markers and in silico analysis of meshed model
- 142 Downloads
Degenerative disc disease (DDD) is a common condition in elderly population that can be painful and can significantly affect individual’s quality of life. Diagnosis of DDD allows prompt corrective actions but it is challenging due to the absence of any symptoms at early stages. In studying disc degeneration, measurement of the range of motion (RoM) and loads acting on the spine are crucial factors. However, direct measurement of RoM involves increased instrumentation and risk. In this paper, an innovative method is proposed for calculating RoM, emphasizing repeatability and reliability by considering the posterior thickness of the spine. This is achieved by offsetting the position of markers in relation to the actual vertebral loci. Three geometrically identical finite element models of L3-L4 are developed from a CT scan with different types of elements, and thereafter, mesh element-related metrics are provided for the assessment of the quality of models. The model with the best mesh quality is used for further analysis, where RoM are within ranges as reported in literature and in vivo experiment results. Various kinds of stresses acting on individual components including facet joints are analysed for normal and abnormal loading conditions. The results showed that the stresses in abnormal load conditions for all components including cortical (76.67 MPa), cancellous (69.18 MPa), annulus (6.30 MPa) and nucleus (0.343 MPa) are significantly greater as compared to normal loads (49.96 MPa, 44.2 MPa, 4.28 MPa and 0.23 MPa respectively). However, stress levels for both conditions are within safe limits (167–215 MPa for cortical, 46 MPa for the annulus and 3 MPa for facets). The results obtained could be used as a baseline motion and stresses of healthy subjects based on their respective lifestyles, which could benefit clinicians to suggest corrective actions for those affected by DDD.
KeywordsBiomechanics Kinesis Kinematics Lumbar spine Biomedical image processing In silico
This work was supported by the Fundamental Research Grant Scheme (FRGS), JABATAN PENGAJIAN TINGGI KEMENTERIAN PENDIDIKAN MALAYSIA under Grant Project No.: FRGS/ 1/ 2015 / TK03 / MUSM / 02 / 1 and the DST – FIST (Government of India) under Grant Ref. No. SR / FST/ ETI – 311 / 2012.
Compliance with ethical standards
Ethical approval for the current research study was obtained from the Monash University Human Research Ethics Committee (MUHREC), Australia, and all participants provided with written consent forms. Reference: CF16/2165 - 2016001072, Name of the Ethic Committee: Monash University Human Research Ethics Committee (MUHREC), Australia.
Consent for publication
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
- 1.Wang H, Naghavi M, Allen C, Barber R, Bhutta Z, Carter A, Casey D, Charlson F, Chen A, Coates M et al (2016) Global, regional, and national disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) for 315 diseases and injuries and healthy life expectancy (HALE), 1990–2015: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015. Lancet 388:1603–1658. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31460-X CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.Chen C-H, Chen-Sheng C, Chang-Jung C (2017) Assessment of the suitability of biodegradable rods for use in posterior lumbar fusion: an in-vitro biomechanical evaluation and finite element analysis. PLoS One 12:e0188034. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0188034 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 11.Yun-Peng H, Cheng-Fei D, Cheng-Kung C, Zheng-Cheng Z, Xuan-Wei C, Wu G, Zhe-Cheng L, Jian-Hua L, Wang L (2016) Preserving posterior complex can prevent adjacent segment disease following posterior lumbar interbody fusion surgeries: a finite element analysis. PLoS One 11:e0166452. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0166452 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.Dreischarf M, Zander T, Shirazi-Adl A, Puttlitz CM, Adam CJ, Chen CS, Goel VK, Kiapour A, Kim YH, Labus KM, Little JP, Park WM, Wang YH, Wilke HJ, Rohlmann A, Schmidt H (2014) Comparison of eight published static finite element models of the intact lumbar spine: predictive power of models improves when combined together. J Biomech 47:1757–1766. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2014.04.002 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 13.Little J, Adam CJ (2013) Geometric sensitivity of patient-specific finite element models of the spine to variability in user-selected anatomical landmarks. 18Google Scholar
- 14.Sevrain A, Aubin C-E, Gharbi H, Wang X, Labelle H (2012) Biomechanical evaluation of predictive parameters of progression in adolescent isthmic spondylolisthesis: a computer modeling and simulation study. Scoliosis 7(2). https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-7161-7-2
- 15.Huang JY, Li HY, Jian FZ, Yan HG (2012) The finite element modeling and analysis of human lumbar segment herniation. 12:394–398Google Scholar
- 32.Tsouknidas A, Savvakis S, Asaniotis Y, Anagnostidis K, Lontos A, Michailidis N (2013) The effect of kyphoplasty parameters on the dynamic load transfer within the lumbar spine considering the response of a bio-realistic spine segment. Clin Biomech 28:949–955. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2013.09.013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 38.H. Schmidt, A. Kettler, F. Heuer, U. Simon, L. Claes, and H.-J. Wilke, Intradiscal pressure, shear strain, and fiber strain in the intervertebral disc under combined loading. 2007, pp. 748–55Google Scholar
- 39.An YH, Draughn RA (2000) Mechanical testing of bone and the bone-implant interface. In: An YH, Draughn RA (eds) . CRC Press, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar