An improved biomechanical testing protocol for evaluating spinal arthroplasty and motion preservation devices in a multilevel human cadaveric cervical model.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

38 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

OBJECT: An experimental study was performed to determine the biomechanical end-mounting configurations that replicate in vivo physiological motion of the cervical spine in a multiple-level human cadaveric model. The vertebral motion response for the modified testing protocol was compared to in vivo motion data and traditional pure-moment testing methods. METHODS: Biomechanical tests were performed on fresh human cadaveric cervical spines (C2-T1) mounted in a programmable testing apparatus. Three different end-mounting conditions were studied: pinned-pinned, pinned-fixed, and translational/pinned-fixed. The motion response of the individual segmental vertebral rotations was statistically compared using one-way analysis of variance and Student-Newman-Keuls tests (p < 0.05 unless otherwise stated) to determine differences in the motion responses for different testing methods. CONCLUSIONS: A translational/pinned-fixed mounting configuration induced a bending-moment distribution across the cervical spine, resulting in a motion response that closely matched the in vivo case. In contrast, application of pure-moment loading did not reproduce the physiological response and is less suitable for studying disc arthroplasty and nonfusion devices.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalNeurosurgical Focus
Volume17
Issue number3
StatePublished - Jan 1 2004

Fingerprint

Arthroplasty
Equipment and Supplies
Spine
Analysis of Variance
Students

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Surgery
  • Clinical Neurology

Cite this

@article{b484f5aa46b945808bc7750584b3270e,
title = "An improved biomechanical testing protocol for evaluating spinal arthroplasty and motion preservation devices in a multilevel human cadaveric cervical model.",
abstract = "OBJECT: An experimental study was performed to determine the biomechanical end-mounting configurations that replicate in vivo physiological motion of the cervical spine in a multiple-level human cadaveric model. The vertebral motion response for the modified testing protocol was compared to in vivo motion data and traditional pure-moment testing methods. METHODS: Biomechanical tests were performed on fresh human cadaveric cervical spines (C2-T1) mounted in a programmable testing apparatus. Three different end-mounting conditions were studied: pinned-pinned, pinned-fixed, and translational/pinned-fixed. The motion response of the individual segmental vertebral rotations was statistically compared using one-way analysis of variance and Student-Newman-Keuls tests (p < 0.05 unless otherwise stated) to determine differences in the motion responses for different testing methods. CONCLUSIONS: A translational/pinned-fixed mounting configuration induced a bending-moment distribution across the cervical spine, resulting in a motion response that closely matched the in vivo case. In contrast, application of pure-moment loading did not reproduce the physiological response and is less suitable for studying disc arthroplasty and nonfusion devices.",
author = "Denis Diangelo and Kevin Foley",
year = "2004",
month = "1",
day = "1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "17",
journal = "Neurosurgical Focus",
issn = "1092-0684",
publisher = "American Association of Neurological Surgeons",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - An improved biomechanical testing protocol for evaluating spinal arthroplasty and motion preservation devices in a multilevel human cadaveric cervical model.

AU - Diangelo, Denis

AU - Foley, Kevin

PY - 2004/1/1

Y1 - 2004/1/1

N2 - OBJECT: An experimental study was performed to determine the biomechanical end-mounting configurations that replicate in vivo physiological motion of the cervical spine in a multiple-level human cadaveric model. The vertebral motion response for the modified testing protocol was compared to in vivo motion data and traditional pure-moment testing methods. METHODS: Biomechanical tests were performed on fresh human cadaveric cervical spines (C2-T1) mounted in a programmable testing apparatus. Three different end-mounting conditions were studied: pinned-pinned, pinned-fixed, and translational/pinned-fixed. The motion response of the individual segmental vertebral rotations was statistically compared using one-way analysis of variance and Student-Newman-Keuls tests (p < 0.05 unless otherwise stated) to determine differences in the motion responses for different testing methods. CONCLUSIONS: A translational/pinned-fixed mounting configuration induced a bending-moment distribution across the cervical spine, resulting in a motion response that closely matched the in vivo case. In contrast, application of pure-moment loading did not reproduce the physiological response and is less suitable for studying disc arthroplasty and nonfusion devices.

AB - OBJECT: An experimental study was performed to determine the biomechanical end-mounting configurations that replicate in vivo physiological motion of the cervical spine in a multiple-level human cadaveric model. The vertebral motion response for the modified testing protocol was compared to in vivo motion data and traditional pure-moment testing methods. METHODS: Biomechanical tests were performed on fresh human cadaveric cervical spines (C2-T1) mounted in a programmable testing apparatus. Three different end-mounting conditions were studied: pinned-pinned, pinned-fixed, and translational/pinned-fixed. The motion response of the individual segmental vertebral rotations was statistically compared using one-way analysis of variance and Student-Newman-Keuls tests (p < 0.05 unless otherwise stated) to determine differences in the motion responses for different testing methods. CONCLUSIONS: A translational/pinned-fixed mounting configuration induced a bending-moment distribution across the cervical spine, resulting in a motion response that closely matched the in vivo case. In contrast, application of pure-moment loading did not reproduce the physiological response and is less suitable for studying disc arthroplasty and nonfusion devices.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=28844500192&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=28844500192&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 17

JO - Neurosurgical Focus

JF - Neurosurgical Focus

SN - 1092-0684

IS - 3

ER -