Mechanisms of Cervical Spine Disc Injury under Cyclic Loading

Narayan Yoganandan,Sagar Umale 대한척추외과학회 2018 Asian Spine Journal Vol.12 No.5

Study Design: Determination of human cervical spine disc response under cyclic loading. Purpose: To explain the potential mechanisms of intervertebral disc injury caused by cyclic loading. Overview of Literature: Certain occupational environments in civilian and military populations may affect the cervical spine of individuals by cyclic loading. Research on this mechanism is scarce. Methods: Here, we developed a finite element model of the human C4–C5 disc. It comprised endplates, five layers of fibers, a nucleus, and an annulus ground substance. The endplates, ground substance, and annular fibers were modeled with elastic, hyperviscoelastic, and hyper-elastic materials, respectively. We subjected the disc to compressive loading (150 N) for 10,000 cycles at frequencies of 2 Hz (low) and 4 Hz (high). We measured disc displacements over the entire loading period. We obtained maximum and minimum principal stress and strain and von Mises stress distributions at both frequencies for all components. Further, we used contours to infer potential mechanisms of internal load transfer within the disc components. Results: The points of the model disc displacement versus the loading cycles were within the experimental corridors for both frequencies. The principal stresses were higher in the ground matrix, maximum stress was higher in the anterior and posterior annular regions, and minimum stress was higher along the superior and inferior peripheries. The maximum principal strains were radially directed, whereas the minimum principal strains were axially/obliquely directed. The stresses in the fibers were greater and concentrated in the posterolateral regions in the innermost layer. Conclusions: Disc displacement was lower at high frequency, thus exhibiting strain rate stiffening and explaining stress accumulation at superior and interior peripheries. Greater stresses and strains at the boundaries explain disc injuries, such as delamination. The greater development of stresses in the innermost annular fiber layer (migrating toward the posterolateral regions) explains disc prolapse.

A Comparison Study of Four Cervical Disk Arthroplasty Devices Using Finite Element Models

Purushothaman Yuvaraj,Choi Hoon,Yoganandan Narayan,Jebaseelan Davidson,Baisden Jamie,Kurpad Shekar 대한척추외과학회 2021 Asian Spine Journal Vol.15 No.3

Study Design: The study examined and compared four artificial cervical disks using validated finite element models. Purpose: To compare and contrast the biomechanical behavior of four artificial cervical disks by determining the external (range of motion) and internal (facet force and intradiscal pressure) responses following cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) and to elucidate any device design effects on cervical biomechanics. Overview of Literature: Despite CDA’s increasing popularity most studies compare the CDA procedure with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. There is little comparative evaluation of different artificial disks and, therefore, little understanding of how varying disk designs may influence spinal biomechanics. Methods: A validated C2–T1 finite element model was subjected to flexion-extension. CDAs were simulated at the C5–C6 level with the Secure-C, Mobi-C, Prestige LP, and Prodisc C prosthetic disks. We used a hybrid loading protocol to apply sagittal moments. Normalized motions at the index and adjacent levels, and intradiscal pressures and facet column loads were also obtained. Results: The ranges of motion at the index level increased after CDA. The Mobi-C prosthesis demonstrated the highest amount of flexion, followed by the Secure-C, Prestige LP, and Prodisc C. The Secure-C demonstrated the highest amount of extension, followed by the Mobi-C, Prodisc C, and Prestige LP. The motion decreased at the rostral and caudal adjacent levels. Facet forces increased at the index level and decreased at the rostral and caudal adjacent levels following CDA. Intradiscal pressures decreased at the adjacent levels for the Mobi-C, Secure-C, and Prodisc C. Conversely, the use of the Prestige LP increased intradiscal pressure at both adjacent levels. Conclusions: While all artificial disks were useful in restoring the index level motion, the Secure-C and Mobi-C translating abilities allowed for lower intradiscal pressures at the adjacent segments and may be the driving mechanism for minimizing adjacent segment degenerative arthritic changes. The facet joint integrity should also be considered in the clinical decision-making process for CDA selection.

Biomechanical Analysis of 3-Level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Under Physiologic Loads Using a Finite Element Model

Lee A. Tan,Narayan Yoganandan,Hoon Choi,Yuvaraj Purushothaman,Davidson Jebaseelan,Aju Bosco 대한척추신경외과학회 2022 Neurospine Vol.19 No.2

Objective: Pseudarthrosis and adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) are 2 common complications after multilevel anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). We aim to identify the potential biomechanical factors contributing to pseudarthrosis and ASD following 3-level ACDF using a cervical spine finite element model (FEM). Methods: A validated cervical spine FEM from C2 to C7 was used to study the biomechanical factors in cervical spine intervention. The FEM model was used to simulate a 3-level ACDF with intervertebral spacers and anterior cervical plating with screw fixation from C4 to C7. The model was then constrained at the inferior nodes of the T1 vertebra, and physiological loads were applied at the top vertebra. The pure moment load of 2 Nm was applied in flexion, extension, and lateral bending. A follower axial force of 75 N was applied to reproduce the weight of the cranium and muscle force, was applied using standard procedures. The motion-controlled hybrid protocol was utilized to comprehend the adjustments in the spinal biomechanics. Results: Our cervical spine FEM demonstrated that the cranial adjacent level (C3–4) had significantly more increase in range of motion (ROM) (+90.38%) compared to the caudal adjacent level at C7–T1 (+70.18%) after C4–7 ACDF, indicating that the cranial adjacent level has more compensatory increase in ROM than the caudal adjacent level, potentially predisposing it to earlier ASD. Within the C4–7 ACDF construct, the C6–7 level had the least robust fixation during fixation compared to C4–5 and C5–6, as reflected by the smallest reduction in ROM compared to intact spine (-71.30% vs. -76.36% and -77.05%, respectively), which potentially predisposes the C6–7 level to higher risk of pseudarthrosis. Conclusion: Biomechanical analysis of C4–7 ACDF construct using a validated cervical spine FEM indicated that the C3–4 has more compensatory increase in ROM compared to C7–T1, and C6–7 has the least robust fixation under physiological loads. These findings can help spine surgeons to predicate the areas with higher risks of pseudarthrosis and ASD, and thus developing corresponding strategies to mitigate these risks and provide appropriate preoperative counseling to patients.

Identification of Pedicle Screw Pullout Load Paths for Osteoporotic Vertebrae

Krishnan Venkatesh,Varghese Vicky,Kumar Gurunathan Saravana,Yoganandan Narayan 대한척추외과학회 2020 Asian Spine Journal Vol.14 No.3

Study Design: A biomechanical study.Purpose: To determine the actual load path and compare pullout strengths as a function of screw size used in revision surgeries using postmortem human subject specimens.Overview of Literature: Pedicle screw fixation has become the standard of care in the surgical management of spinal instability. However, pullout failures are widely observed in osteoporotic spines and treated by revision surgeries using a higher diameter screw, performing cement augmentation, or increasing the levels of fixation. While the peak forces to final pullout are reported, the actual load path to achieve the final force level is not available. Methods: Six osteoporotic lumbar spines (L2–L5) were instrumented with 5.5×40 mm polyaxial screws and loaded along the axis of the screw using a material testing machine according to American Society for Testing of Materials 543-07 test protocol. Tests were again conducted by replacing them with 6.5×40 mm (group A) or 7.5×40 mm (group B) screws. Force-displacement data were grouped and load paths (mean±1 standard deviation) were compared.Results: Pullout strength decreased by 36% when the size of the revision screw was increased by 1 mm, while it increased by 35% when the size of the revision screw was increased by 2 mm compared to the index screw value. While the morphologies of the load paths were similar in all cases, they differ between the two groups: the larger screw responded with generally elevated stiffer path than the smaller screw, suggesting that revision surgery using a larger screw has more purchase along the inserted body-pedicle axis.Conclusions: A larger screw enhances strength and increases biomechanical stability in revision surgeries, although the final surgical decision is made by the clinician, which includes the patient’s anatomy and associated characteristics.