4.5 Article Proceedings Paper

Estimation of in vivo inter-vertebral loading during motion using fluoroscopic and magnetic resonance image informed finite element models

Journal

JOURNAL OF BIOMECHANICS
Volume 70, Issue -, Pages 134-139

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2017.09.025

Keywords

Finite element model; Lumbar spine; Fluoroscopy; Magnetic resonance imaging

Funding

  1. Chiropractic Research Council, UK

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Finite element (FE) models driven by medical image data can be used to estimate subject-specific spinal biomechanics. This study aimed to combine magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and quantitative fluoroscopy (QF) in subject-specific FE models of upright standing, flexion and extension. Supine MR images of the lumbar spine were acquired from healthy participants using a 0.5 T MR scanner. Nine 3D quasi static linear FE models of L3 to L5 were created with an elastic nucleus and orthotropic annulus. QF data was acquired from the same participants who performed trunk flexion to 60 degrees and trunk extension to 20 degrees. The displacements and rotations of the vertebrae were calculated and applied to the FE model. Stresses were averaged across the nucleus region and transformed to the disc co-ordinate system (S1 = mediolat eral, S2 = anteroposterior, S3 = axial). In upright standing S3 was predicted to be -0.7 +/- 0.6 MPa (L3L4) and -0.6 +/- 0.5 MPa (L4L5). S3 increased to -2.0 +/- 1.3 MPa (L3L4) and -1.2 +/- 0.6 MPa (L4L5) in full flexion and to -1.1 +/- 0.8 MPa (L3L4) and -0.7 +/- 0.5 MPa (L4L5) in full extension. S1 and S2 followed similar patterns; shear was small apart from S23. Disc stresses correlated to disc orientation and wedging. The results demonstrate that MR and QF data can be combined in a participant-specific FE model to investigate spinal biomechanics in vivo and that predicted stresses are within ranges reported in the literature. (C) 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available