Dataset Information

Six-degrees-of-freedom cervical spine range of motion during dynamic flexion-extension after single-level anterior arthrodesis: comparison with asymptomatic control subjects.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The etiology of adjacent-segment disease following cervical spine arthrodesis remains controversial. The objective of the current study was to evaluate cervical intervertebral range of motion during dynamic flexion-extension in patients who had undergone a single-level arthrodesis and in asymptomatic control subjects.

Methods

Ten patients who had undergone a single-level (C5/C6) anterior arthrodesis and twenty asymptomatic control subjects performed continuous full range-of-motion flexion-extension while biplane radiographs were collected at thirty images per second. A previously validated tracking process determined three-dimensional vertebral position on each pair of radiographs with submillimeter accuracy. Six-degrees-of-freedom kinematics between adjacent vertebrae were calculated throughout the entire flexion-extension movement cycle over multiple trials for each participant. Cervical kinematics were also calculated from images collected during static full flexion and static full extension.

Results

The C4/C5 motion segment moved through a larger extension range of motion and a smaller flexion range of motion in the subjects with the arthrodesis than in the controls. The extension difference between the arthrodesis and control groups was 3.8° (95% CI [confidence interval], 0.9° to 6.6°; p = 0.011) and the flexion difference was -2.9° (95% CI, -5.3° to -0.5°; p = 0.019). Adjacent-segment posterior translation was greater in the arthrodesis group than in the controls, with a C4/C5 difference of 0.8 mm (95% CI, 0.0 to 1.6 mm) and a C6/C7 difference of 0.4 mm (95% CI, 0.0 to 0.8 mm; p = 0.016). Translation range of motion and rotation range of motion were consistently larger when measured on images collected during dynamic functional movement as opposed to images collected at static full flexion or full extension. The upper 95% CI limit for anterior-posterior translation range of motion was 3.45 mm at C3/C4 and C4/C5, but only 2.3 mm at C6/C7.

Conclusions

C5/C6 arthrodesis does not affect the total range of motion in adjacent vertebral segments, but it does alter the distribution of adjacent-segment motion toward more extension and less flexion superior to the arthrodesis and more posterior translation superior and inferior to the arthrodesis during in vivo functional loading. Range of motion measured from static full-flexion and full-extension images underestimates dynamic range of motion. Clinical evaluation of excessive anterior-posterior translation should take into account the cervical vertebral level.

SUBMITTER: Anderst WJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3748975 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:A longitudinal study using biplane radiography to measure in vivo intervertebral range of motion (ROM) during dynamic flexion/extension, and rotation.To longitudinally compare intervertebral maximal ROM and midrange motion in asymptomatic control subjects and single-level arthrodesis patients.In vitro studies consistently report that adjacent segment maximal ROM increases superior and inferior to cervical arthrodesis. Previous in vivo results have been conflicting, indicating that maximal ROM may or may not increase superior and/or inferior to the arthrodesis. There are no previous reports of midrange motion in arthrodesis patients and similar-aged controls.Eight single-level (C5/C6) anterior arthrodesis patients (tested 7?±?1 months and 28?±?6 months postsurgery) and six asymptomatic control subjects (tested twice, 58?±?6 months apart) performed dynamic full ROM flexion/extension and axial rotation whereas biplane radiographs were collected at 30?images per second. A previously validated tracking process determined three-dimensional vertebral position from each pair of radiographs with submillimeter accuracy. The intervertebral maximal ROM and midrange motion in flexion/extension, rotation, lateral bending, and anterior-posterior translation were compared between test dates and between groups.Adjacent segment maximal ROM did not increase over time during flexion/extension, or rotation movements. Adjacent segment maximal rotational ROM was not significantly greater in arthrodesis patients than in corresponding motion segments of similar-aged controls. C4/C5 adjacent segment rotation during the midrange of head motion and maximal anterior-posterior translation were significantly greater in arthrodesis patients than in the corresponding motion segment in controls on the second test date.C5/C6 arthrodesis appears to significantly affect midrange, but not end-range, adjacent segment motions. The effects of arthrodesis on adjacent segment motion may be best evaluated by longitudinal studies that compare maximal and midrange adjacent segment motion to corresponding motion segments of similar-aged controls to determine if the adjacent segment motion is truly excessive.3.

Project description:A precise and comprehensive definition of "normal" in vivo cervical kinematics does not exist due to high intersubject variability and the absence of midrange kinematic data. In vitro test protocols and finite element models that are validated using only end range of motion data may not accurately reproduce continuous in vivo motion.The primary objective of this study was to precisely quantify cervical spine intervertebral kinematics during continuous, functional flexion-extension in asymptomatic subjects. The advantages of assessing continuous intervertebral kinematics were demonstrated by comparing asymptomatic controls with patients with single-level anterior arthrodesis.Cervical spine kinematics were determined during continuous in vivo flexion-extension in a clinically relevant age group of asymptomatic controls and a group of patients with C5-C6 arthrodesis.The patient sample consisted of 6 patients with single-level (C5-C6) anterior arthrodesis (average age: 48.8±6.9 years; 1 male, 5 female; 7.6±1.2 months postsurgery) and 18 asymptomatic control subjects of similar age (average age: 45.6±5.8 years; 5 male, 13 female).Outcome measures included the physiologic measure of continuous kinematic motion paths at each cervical motion segment (C2-C7) during flexion-extension.Participants performed flexion-extension while biplane radiographs were collected at 30 images per second. A previously validated tracking process determined three-dimensional vertebral positions with submillimeter accuracy. Continuous flexion-extension rotation and anterior-posterior translation motion paths were adjusted for disc height and static orientation of each corresponding motion segment.Intersubject variability in flexion-extension angle was decreased 15% to 46% and intersubject variability in anterior-posterior translation was reduced 14% to 33% after adjusting for disc height and static orientation angle. Average intersubject variability in continuous motion paths was 1.9° in flexion-extension and 0.6 mm in translation. Third-order polynomial equations were determined to precisely describe the continuous flexion-extension and anterior-posterior translation motion path at each motion segment (all R2>0.99).A significant portion of the intersubject variability in cervical kinematics can be explained by the disc height and the static orientation of each motion segment. Clinically relevant information may be gained by assessing intervertebral kinematics during continuous functional movement rather than at static, end range of motion positions. The fidelity of in vitro cervical spine mechanical testing protocols may be evaluated by comparing in vitro kinematics to the continuous motion paths presented.

Project description:BackgroundMeasurement of lumbar spine range of motion (ROM) is often considered to be an essential component of lumbar spine physiotherapy and orthopedic assessment. The measurement can be carried out through various instruments such as inclinometers, goniometers, and etc. Recent smartphones have been equipped with accelerometers and magnetometers, which, through specific software applications (apps) can be used for inclinometric functions.PurposeThe main purpose was to investigate the reliability and validity of an iPhone(®) app (TiltMeter(©) -advanced level and inclinometer) for measuring standing lumbar spine flexion-extension ROM in asymptomatic subjects.DesignA cross-sectional study was carried out.SettingThis study was conducted in a physiotherapy clinic located at School of Rehabilitation Sciences, Iran University of Medical Science and Health Services, Tehran, Iran.SubjectsA convenience sample of 30 asymptomatic adults (15 males; 15 females; age range = 18-55 years) was recruited between August 2015 and December 2015.MethodsFollowing a 2-minute warm-up, the subjects were asked to stand in a relaxed position and their skin was marked at the T12-L1 and S1-S2 spinal levels. From this position, they were asked to perform maximum lumbar flexion followed by maximum lumbar extension with their knees straight. Two blinded raters each used an inclinometer and the iPhone (®) app to measure lumbar spine flexion-extension ROM. A third rater read the measured angles. To calculate total lumbar spine flexion-extension ROM, the measurement from S1-S2 was subtracted from T12-L1. The second (2 hours later) and third (48 hours later) sessions were carried out in the same manner as the first session. All of the measurements were conducted 3 times and the mean value of 3 repetitions for each measurement was used for analysis. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) models (3, k) and (2, k) were used to determine the intra-rater and inter-rater reliability, respectively. The Pearson correlation coefficients were used to establish concurrent validity of the iPhone(®) app. Furthermore, minimum detectable change at the 95% confidence level (MDC95) was computed as 1.96 × standard error of measurement × [Formula: see text].ResultsGood to excellent intra-rater and inter-rater reliability were demonstrated for both the gravity-based inclinometer with ICC values of ?0.84 and ?0.77 and the iPhone(®) app with ICC values of ?0.85 and ?0.85, respectively. The MDC95 ranged from 5.82°to 8.18°for the intra-rater analysis and from 7.38°to 8.66° for the inter-rater analysis. The concurrent validity for flexion and extension between the 2 instruments was 0.85 and 0.91, respectively.ConclusionsThe iPhone(®)app possesses good to excellent intra-rater and inter-rater reliability and concurrent validity. It seems that the iPhone(®) app can be used for the measurement of lumbar spine flexion-extension ROM.Level of evidenceIIb.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Physiological motion of the lumbar spine is a subject of interest for musculoskeletal health care professionals, as abnormal motion is believed to be related to lumbar conditions and complaints. Many researchers have described ranges of motion for the lumbar spine, but only a few have mentioned specific motion patterns of each individual segment during flexion and extension. These motion patterns mostly comprise the sequence of segmental initiation in sagittal rotation. However, an adequate definition of physiological motion of the lumbar spine is still lacking. The reason for this is the reporting of different ranges of motion and sequences of segmental initiation in previous studies. Furthermore, due to insufficient fields of view, none of these papers have reported on maximum flexion and extension motion patterns of L1 to S1. In the lower cervical spine, a consistent pattern of segmental contributions was recently described. In order to understand physiological motion of the lumbar spine, it is necessary to systematically study motion patterns, including the sequence of segmental contribution, of vertebrae L1 to S1 in healthy individuals during maximum flexion and extension. OBJECTIVE:This study aims to define the lumbar spines' physiological motion pattern of vertebrae L1, L2, L3, L4, L5, and S1 by determining the sequence of segmental contribution and the sequence of segmental initiation of motion in sagittal rotation of each vertebra during maximum flexion and extension. The secondary endpoint will be exploring the possibility of analyzing the intervertebral horizontal and vertical translation of each vertebra during maximum flexion and extension. METHODS:Cinematographic recordings will be performed in 11 healthy male participants, aged 18-25 years, without a history of spine problems. Cinematographic flexion and extension recordings will be made at two time points with a minimum 2-week interval in between. RESULTS:The study has been approved by the local institutional medical ethical committee (Medical Research Ethics Committee of Zuyderland and Zuyd University of applied sciences) on September 24, 2018. Inclusion of participants will be completed in 2020. CONCLUSIONS:If successful, these physiological motion patterns can be compared with motion patterns of patients with lumbar conditions before or after surgery. Ultimately, researchers may be able to determine differences in biomechanics that can potentially be linked to physical complaints like low back pain. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03737227; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03737227. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID):DERR1-10.2196/14741.