BIOMECHANICAL STUDY ON UPPER THORACIC SPINE BASED ON PRESSURE SENSITIVE FILM MATERIALS IN CHINESE MINI PIGS_Chinese Journal of Reparative and Reconstructive Surgery

Authors：

 MENGZhao ¹ , WANGChen ¹ , GUOXuzhao ¹ , CHENWei ² , DINGWenyuan ² , LIUFengyu ²

1. The Second Department of Orthopaedics, Children's Hospital of Hebei Province, Shijiazhuang Hebei, 050031, P. R. China;
2. Department of Orthopaedics, the Third Affiliated Hospital of Hebei Medical University;

Corresponding author：

MENGZhao, Email: mz285@163.com

Keywords：

Scoliosis; Upper thoracic spine; Biomechanics; Pressure sensitive material

DOI：

10.7507/1002-1892.20160201

Video：

Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Objective To analyze the pressure change and distribution of the intervertebral disc of upper thoracic spine in vertical pressure and 5° flexion, extension, or lateral bending. Methods Twelve thoracolumbar spinal specimens were harvested from mini pigs and were divided into 2 groups (n=6). T_{1, 2}, T_{3, 4}, T_{5, 6}, and T_{7, 8} segments were included in one group, and T_{2, 3}, T_{4, 5}, T_{6, 7}, and T_{8, 9} segments were included in the other group. The data from both groups represented the complete upper thoracic vertebra data. Biomechanical machine and pressure sensitive film were used to measure the pressure on the vertebral columns under loadings of 100, 150, and 200 N in vertical pressures and 5° flexion, extension, or lateral bending. The pressure change of each intervertebral disc under different loads and in different movement conditions was analyzed. Results In flexion, the anterior annulus pressure of the upper thoracic vertebra increased (P < 0.05), whereas the posterior annulus pressure showed no significant change (P > 0.05) or an increasing trend (P < 0.05). In extension, the anterior annulus pressure of the upper thoracic vertebra decreased (P < 0.05), whereas the posterior annulus pressure decreased (P < 0.05) or had no obvious change (P > 0.05). In lateral bending, the pressure on the concave side of the annulus increased significantly (P < 0.05). Conclusion The upper thoracic vertebra has unique biomechanical characteristics under different loadings; moreover, the posterior vertebral structure plays an important role in the movement of the upper thoracic vertebral segment and pressure distribution. In lateral bending of the upper thoracic vertebra, the concave side pressure will increase significantly, which suggests that asymmetrical force is an important cause of scoliosis progression. Gravity plays an important role in the progression of scoliosis.

Citation： MENGZhao, WANGChen, GUOXuzhao, CHENWei, DINGWenyuan, LIUFengyu. BIOMECHANICAL STUDY ON UPPER THORACIC SPINE BASED ON PRESSURE SENSITIVE FILM MATERIALS IN CHINESE MINI PIGS. Chinese Journal of Reparative and Reconstructive Surgery, 2016, 30(8): 992-997. doi: 10.7507/1002-1892.20160201 Copy

1.	Shakil H, Iqbal ZA, Al-Ghadir AH, et al. Scoliosis:Review of types of curves, etiological theories and conservative treatment. J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil, 2014, 27(2):111-115.
2.	Harrington PR. The etiology of idiopathic scoliosis. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 1977, (126):17-25.
3.	Yamada K, Yamamoto H, Nakagawa Y, et al. Etiology of idiopathic scoliosis. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 1984, (184):50-57.
4.	Burwell RG. Aetiology of idiopathic scoliosis:current concepts. Pediatr Rehabil, 2003, 6(3-4):137-170.
5.	Perdriolle R, Becchetti S, Vidal J, et al. Mechanical process and growth cartilages. Essential factors in the progression of scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 1993, 18(3):343-349.
6.	Mente PL, Stokes IA, Spence H, et al. Progression of vertebral wedging in an asymmetrically loaded rat tail model. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 1997, 22(12):1292-1296.
7.	Stokes IA, Iatridis JC. Mechanical conditions that accelerate intervertebral disc degeneration:overload versus immobilization. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2004, 29(23):2724-2732.
8.	Stokes IA, Aronsson DD. Disc and vertebral wedging in patients with progressive scoliosis. J Spinal Disord, 2001, 14(4):317-322.
9.	Adams MA, McNally DS, Dolan P. Stress' distributions inside intervertebral discs. The effects of age and degeneration. J Bone Joint Surg (Br), 1996, 78(6):965-972.
10.	Yildiz KI, Isik C, Tecimel O, et al. Use of contact pressure-sensitive surfaces as an indicator of graft tension in medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg, 2013, 133(12): 1657-1663.
11.	Liau JJ, Cheng CK, Huang CH, et al. Effect of Fuji pressure sensitive film on actual contact characteristics of artificial tibiofemoral joint. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon), 2002, 17(9-10):698-704.
12.	刘长征, 姚庆强, 郑圣鼐, 等.非融合棘突间固定器不同棘突间撑开高度对植入节段椎间盘压力分布的影响.中国组织工程研究与临床康复, 2011, 15(39):7279-7283.
13.	Edwards WT, Ordway NR, Zheng Y, et al. Peak stresses observed in the posterior lateral anulus. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2001, 26(16): 1753-1759.
14.	McMillan DW, McNally DS, Garbutt G, et al. Stress distributions inside intervertebral discs:the validity of experimental 'stress profilometry'. Proc Inst Mech Eng H, 1996, 210(2):81-87.
15.	McNally DS, Adams MA. Internal intervertebral disc mechanics as revealed by stress profilometry. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 1992, 17(1): 66-73.
16.	McNally DS, Adams MA, Goodship AE. Development and validation of a new transducer for intradiscal pressure measurement. J Biomed Eng, 1992, 14(6):495-498.
17.	Nachemson AL. Disc Pressure Measurements. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 1981, 6(1):93-97.
18.	Gay RE, Zhao KD, Ilharreborde B, et al. The reliability of intradiscal stress profilometry in cadaveric lumbar discs. Journal of Musculoskeletal Research, 2006, 10(4):163-171.
19.	Steffen T, Baramki HG, Rubin R, et al. Lumbar intradiscal pressure measured in the anterior and posterolateral annular regions during asymmetrical loading. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon), 1998, 13(7): 495-505.
20.	McAfee PC, Yuan HA, Fredrickson BE, et al. The value of computed tomography in thoracolumbar fractures. An analysis of one hundred consecutive cases and a new classification. J Bone Joint Surg (Am), 1983, 65(4):461-473.
21.	Mehlman CT, Araghi A, Roy DR. Hyphenated history:the HueterVolkmann law. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ), 1997, 26(11):798-800.
22.	Stokes IA, Spence H, Aronsson DD, et al. Mechanical modulation of vertebral body growth. Implications for scoliosis progression. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 1996, 21(10):1162-1167.
23.	Mente PL, Aronsson DD, Stokes IA, et al. Mechanical modulation of growth for the correction of vertebral wedge deformities. J Orthop Res, 1999, 17(4):518-524.
24.	Arkin AM, Katz JF. The Effects of Pressure on Epiphyseal Growth-The Mechanism of Plasticity of Growing Bone. J Bone Joint Surg (Am), 1956, 38-A(5):1056-1076.
25.	Aronsson DD, Stokes IA, Rosovsky J, et al. Mechanical modulation of calf tail vertebral growth:implications for scoliosis progression. J Spinal Disord, 1999, 12(2):141-146.
26.	Stokes IA, Aronsson DD, Spence H, et al. Mechanical modulation of intervertebral disc thickness in growing rat tails. J Spinal Disord, 1998, 11(3):261-265.
27.	Coillard C, Rhalmi S, Rivard CH, et al. Experimental scoliosis in the minipig:study of vertebral deformations. Ann Chir, 1999, 53(8): 773-780.
28.	Lowe TG, Edgar M, Chir M, et al. Etiology of idiopathic scoliosis: current trends in research. J Bone Joint Surg (Am), 2000, 82-A(8): 1157-1168.

1. Shakil H, Iqbal ZA, Al-Ghadir AH, et al. Scoliosis:Review of types of curves, etiological theories and conservative treatment. J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil, 2014, 27(2):111-115.
2. Harrington PR. The etiology of idiopathic scoliosis. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 1977, (126):17-25.
3. Yamada K, Yamamoto H, Nakagawa Y, et al. Etiology of idiopathic scoliosis. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 1984, (184):50-57.
4. Burwell RG. Aetiology of idiopathic scoliosis:current concepts. Pediatr Rehabil, 2003, 6(3-4):137-170.
5. Perdriolle R, Becchetti S, Vidal J, et al. Mechanical process and growth cartilages. Essential factors in the progression of scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 1993, 18(3):343-349.
6. Mente PL, Stokes IA, Spence H, et al. Progression of vertebral wedging in an asymmetrically loaded rat tail model. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 1997, 22(12):1292-1296.
7. Stokes IA, Iatridis JC. Mechanical conditions that accelerate intervertebral disc degeneration:overload versus immobilization. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2004, 29(23):2724-2732.
8. Stokes IA, Aronsson DD. Disc and vertebral wedging in patients with progressive scoliosis. J Spinal Disord, 2001, 14(4):317-322.
9. Adams MA, McNally DS, Dolan P. Stress' distributions inside intervertebral discs. The effects of age and degeneration. J Bone Joint Surg (Br), 1996, 78(6):965-972.
10. Yildiz KI, Isik C, Tecimel O, et al. Use of contact pressure-sensitive surfaces as an indicator of graft tension in medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg, 2013, 133(12): 1657-1663.
11. Liau JJ, Cheng CK, Huang CH, et al. Effect of Fuji pressure sensitive film on actual contact characteristics of artificial tibiofemoral joint. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon), 2002, 17(9-10):698-704.
12. 刘长征, 姚庆强, 郑圣鼐, 等.非融合棘突间固定器不同棘突间撑开高度对植入节段椎间盘压力分布的影响.中国组织工程研究与临床康复, 2011, 15(39):7279-7283.
13. Edwards WT, Ordway NR, Zheng Y, et al. Peak stresses observed in the posterior lateral anulus. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2001, 26(16): 1753-1759.
14. McMillan DW, McNally DS, Garbutt G, et al. Stress distributions inside intervertebral discs:the validity of experimental 'stress profilometry'. Proc Inst Mech Eng H, 1996, 210(2):81-87.
15. McNally DS, Adams MA. Internal intervertebral disc mechanics as revealed by stress profilometry. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 1992, 17(1): 66-73.
16. McNally DS, Adams MA, Goodship AE. Development and validation of a new transducer for intradiscal pressure measurement. J Biomed Eng, 1992, 14(6):495-498.
17. Nachemson AL. Disc Pressure Measurements. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 1981, 6(1):93-97.
18. Gay RE, Zhao KD, Ilharreborde B, et al. The reliability of intradiscal stress profilometry in cadaveric lumbar discs. Journal of Musculoskeletal Research, 2006, 10(4):163-171.
19. Steffen T, Baramki HG, Rubin R, et al. Lumbar intradiscal pressure measured in the anterior and posterolateral annular regions during asymmetrical loading. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon), 1998, 13(7): 495-505.
20. McAfee PC, Yuan HA, Fredrickson BE, et al. The value of computed tomography in thoracolumbar fractures. An analysis of one hundred consecutive cases and a new classification. J Bone Joint Surg (Am), 1983, 65(4):461-473.
21. Mehlman CT, Araghi A, Roy DR. Hyphenated history:the HueterVolkmann law. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ), 1997, 26(11):798-800.
22. Stokes IA, Spence H, Aronsson DD, et al. Mechanical modulation of vertebral body growth. Implications for scoliosis progression. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 1996, 21(10):1162-1167.
23. Mente PL, Aronsson DD, Stokes IA, et al. Mechanical modulation of growth for the correction of vertebral wedge deformities. J Orthop Res, 1999, 17(4):518-524.
24. Arkin AM, Katz JF. The Effects of Pressure on Epiphyseal Growth-The Mechanism of Plasticity of Growing Bone. J Bone Joint Surg (Am), 1956, 38-A(5):1056-1076.
25. Aronsson DD, Stokes IA, Rosovsky J, et al. Mechanical modulation of calf tail vertebral growth:implications for scoliosis progression. J Spinal Disord, 1999, 12(2):141-146.
26. Stokes IA, Aronsson DD, Spence H, et al. Mechanical modulation of intervertebral disc thickness in growing rat tails. J Spinal Disord, 1998, 11(3):261-265.
27. Coillard C, Rhalmi S, Rivard CH, et al. Experimental scoliosis in the minipig:study of vertebral deformations. Ann Chir, 1999, 53(8): 773-780.
28. Lowe TG, Edgar M, Chir M, et al. Etiology of idiopathic scoliosis: current trends in research. J Bone Joint Surg (Am), 2000, 82-A(8): 1157-1168.

Chinese Journal of Reparative and Reconstructive Surgery

BIOMECHANICAL STUDY ON UPPER THORACIC SPINE BASED ON PRESSURE SENSITIVE FILM MATERIALS IN CHINESE MINI PIGS

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Previous Article

Next Article

Format

Content