Dataset Information

Dependence of lumbar loads on spinopelvic sagittal alignment: An evaluation based on musculoskeletal modeling.

ABSTRACT: Still little is known about how spinopelvic alignment affects spinal load distribution. Musculoskeletal modeling can potentially help to discover associations between spine alignment and risk factors of spinal disorders (e.g. disc herniation, vertebral fracture, spondylolisthesis, low back pain). The present study exploited the AnyBody full-body musculoskeletal model to assess the relation between lumbar loads and spinopelvic alignment in the sagittal plane. The model was evaluated in the standing position. The simulated postures were set using spinopelvic parameters gleaned from the literature and characterizing the healthy adult population. The parameters were: sagittal vertical axis, Roussouly lumbar type, sacral slope, and pelvic incidence. A total of 2772 configurations were simulated based on the following measurements: compression force and anterior shear at levels L4L5 and L5S1; multifidus, longissimus spinae, and rectus abdominis muscle forces. Changes in global sagittal alignment, lumbar typology, and sacral inclination, but not in pelvic incidence, were found to affect intervertebral loads in the lumbar spine and spinal muscle activation. Considering these changes would be advantageous for clinical evaluation, due to the recognized relation between altered loads and risk of disc herniation, vertebral fracture, spondylolisthesis, and low back pain. Musculoskeletal modeling proved to be a valuable biomechanical tool to non-invasively investigate the relation between internal loads and anatomical parameters.

SUBMITTER: Bassani T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6422292 | biostudies-literature | 2019

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Dependence of lumbar loads on spinopelvic sagittal alignment: An evaluation based on musculoskeletal modeling.

Bassani Tito T Casaroli Gloria G Galbusera Fabio F

PloS one 20190318 3

Still little is known about how spinopelvic alignment affects spinal load distribution. Musculoskeletal modeling can potentially help to discover associations between spine alignment and risk factors of spinal disorders (e.g. disc herniation, vertebral fracture, spondylolisthesis, low back pain). The present study exploited the AnyBody full-body musculoskeletal model to assess the relation between lumbar loads and spinopelvic alignment in the sagittal plane. The model was evaluated in the standi ...[more]

PMID: 30883563

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAlthough it is critical to understand the accelerated degeneration of adjacent segments after fusion, the biomechanical properties of the spine have not been thoroughly studied after various fusion techniques. This study investigates whether four Roussouly's sagittal alignment morphotypes have different biomechanical characteristics after different single- or double-level spinal fixations.MethodsThe parametric finite element (FE) models of Roussouly's type (1-4) were developed based on the radiological data of 625 Chinese community population. The four Roussouly's type models were reassembled into four fusion models: single-level L4-5 Coflex fixation model, single-level L4-5 Fusion (pedicle screw fixation) model, double-level Coflex (L4-5) + Fusion (L5-S1) model, and double-level Fusion (L4-5) + Fusion (L4-5) model. A pure moment of 7.5 Nm was applied to simulate the physiological activities of flexion, extension, lateral bending and axial rotation.ResultsBoth single-level and double-level spinal fixation had the greatest effect on lumbar range of motion, disc pressure, and annulus fibrosis stress in flexion, followed by lateral bending, extension, and axial rotation. In all models, the upper adjacent segment was the most influenced by the implantation and bore the most compensation from the fixed segment. For Type 2 lumbar, the L4-L5 Coflex effectively reduced the disc pressure and annulus fibrosis stress in adjacent segments compared to the L4-L5 Fusion. Similarly, the L4-L5 Coflex offered considerable advantages in preserving the biomechanical properties of adjacent segments for Type 1 lumbar. For Type 4 lumbar, the L4-L5 Coflex did not have superiority over the L4-L5 Fusion, resulting in a greater increase in range of motion at adjacent segments in flexion and extension. The difference between the two fixations was not apparent in Type 3 lumbar. Compared to the single-level Fusion, the changes in motion and mechanics of the lumbar increased after both the double-level Coflex + Fusion and Fusion + Fusion fixations, while the differences between two double-level fixation methods on adjacent segments of the four lumbar models were similar to that of the single-level fixation.ConclusionType 3 and Type 4 lumbar have good compensatory ability and therefore allow for a wider range of surgical options, whereas surgical options for small lordotic Type 1 and Type 2 lumbar are more limited and severe.

Project description:BackgroundTotal hip arthroplasty (THA) instability is influenced by acetabular component positioning, spinopelvic function and sagittal spinal alignment. Obesity is considered as a risk factor of THA instability, but the causal relationship remains unknown. This study aimed to investigate the influence of BMI on (1) spinopelvic function (lumbar flexibility, pelvic mobility and hip motion), (2) sagittal spinal alignment pre- and postoperatively and (3) acetabular cup position postoperatively in primary THA patients in a prospective setting.MethodsOne hundred ninety patients receiving primary total hip arthroplasty were enrolled in a prospective cohort study and retrospectively analysed. All patients received stereoradiography (EOS) in standing and relaxed sitting position pre-and postoperatively. C7-sagittal vertical axis (C7-SVA), lumbar lordosis (LL), pelvic incidence (PI), pelvic tilt (PT), anterior plane pelvic tilt (APPT), and pelvic femoral angle (PFA) were assessed. Key parameters of the spinopelvic function were defined as lumbar flexibility (∆ LL = LLstanding - LLsitting), pelvic mobility (∆ PT = PTstanding - PTsitting) and hip motion (∆ PFA = PFAstanding - PFAsitting). Pelvic mobility was further defined based on ∆ PT as stiff, normal and hypermobile (∆ PT < 10°; 10°-30°; > 30°). The patients were stratified to BMI according to WHO definition: normal BMI ≥ 18.5-24.9 kg/m2 (n = 68), overweight ≥ 25.0-29.9 kg/m2 (n = 81) and obese ≥ 30-39.9 kg/m2 (n = 41). Post-hoc analysis according to Hochberg's GT2 was applied to determine differences between BMI groups.ResultsStanding cup inclination was significant higher in the obese group compared to the normal BMI group (45.3° vs. 40.1°; p = 0.015) whereas standing cup anteversion was significantly decreased (22.0° vs. 25.3°; p = 0.011). There were no significant differences for spinopelvic function key parameter lumbar flexibility (∆ LL), pelvic mobility (∆ PT) and hip motion (∆ PFA) in relation to BMI stratified groups. The obese group demonstrated significant enhanced pelvic retroversion compared to the normal BMI group (APPT - 1.8° vs. 2.4°; p = 0.028). The preoperative proportion of stiff pelvic mobility was decreased in the obese group (12.2%) compared to normal (25.0%) and overweight (27.2%) groups. Spinal sagittal alignment in C7-SVA and PI-LL mismatch demonstrated significantly greater imbalance in the obese group compared to the normal BMI group (68.6 mm vs. 42.6 mm, p = 0.002 and 7.7° vs. 1.2°, p = 0.032, respectively) The proportion of patients with imbalanced C7-SVA was higher in the obese (58.5%) than in the normal BMI group (44.1%).ConclusionsThe significantly increased spinal sagittal imbalance with altered pelvic mechanics is a potential cause for the reported increased risk of THA dislocations in obese patients. Consequently, the increased spinal sagittal imbalance in combination with normal pelvic mobility need to be taken into account when performing THA in obese patients.

Dataset Information

Dependence of lumbar loads on spinopelvic sagittal alignment: An evaluation based on musculoskeletal modeling.

Publications

Dependence of lumbar loads on spinopelvic sagittal alignment: An evaluation based on musculoskeletal modeling.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets