Dataset Information

Biomechanics of the upper cervical spine ligaments in axial rotation and flexion-extension: Considerations into the clinical framework.

ABSTRACT: Context:The motion of the upper cervical spine (UCS) has a great interest for analyzing the biomechanical features of this joint complex, especially in case of instability. Although investigators have analyzed numerous kinematics and musculoskeletal characteristics, there are still little data available regarding several suboccipital ligaments such as occipito-atlantal, atlantoaxial, and cruciform ligaments. Objective:The aim of this study is to quantify the length and moment arm magnitudes of suboccipital ligaments and to integrate data into specific 3D-model, including musculoskeletal and motion representation. Materials and Methods:Based on a recent method, suboccipital ligaments were identified using UCS anatomical modeling. Biomechanical characteristics of these anatomical structures were assessed for sagittal and transversal displacements regarding length and moment arm alterations. Results:Outcomes data indicated length alterations >25% for occipito-atlantal, atlanto-axial and apical ligaments. The length alteration of unique ligaments was negligible. Length variation was dependent on the motion direction considered. Regarding moment arm, larger magnitudes were observed for posterior ligaments, and consistent alteration was depicted for these structures. Conclusion:These outcomes supply relevant biomechanical characteristics of the UCS ligaments in flexion-extension and axial rotation by quantifying length and moment arm magnitude. Moreover, 3D anatomical modeling and motion representation can help in the process of understanding of musculoskeletal behaviors of the craniovertebral junction.

SUBMITTER: Beyer B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7546058 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jul-Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Biomechanics of the upper cervical spine ligaments in axial rotation and flexion-extension: Considerations into the clinical framework.

Beyer Benoît B Feipel Véronique V Dugailly Pierre-Michel PM

Journal of craniovertebral junction & spine 20200701 3

<h4>Context</h4>The motion of the upper cervical spine (UCS) has a great interest for analyzing the biomechanical features of this joint complex, especially in case of instability. Although investigators have analyzed numerous kinematics and musculoskeletal characteristics, there are still little data available regarding several suboccipital ligaments such as occipito-atlantal, atlantoaxial, and cruciform ligaments.<h4>Objective</h4>The aim of this study is to quantify the length and moment arm ...[more]

PMID: 33100772

Similar Datasets

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: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:Study Design Retrospective case series. Objectives The kinematics of the cervical spine has been investigated by many researchers. However, the occupancy of the disk bulges, spinal cord, ligamentum flavum, and the rest of the canal as well as the changes of these structures with motion have not yet been investigated. The goal of this study is to investigate these dynamic changes. Methods The kinetic magnetic resonance images of 248 patients (124 men and 124 women) were evaluated, and the occupancy of each structure for each cervical level at neutral, flexion, and extension were calculated. Results Whole canal anteroposterior (AP) diameters showed significant differences between neutral-extension and flexion-extension at the C4-C5 and C5-C6 levels (p < 0.05). The mean disk bulges showed significant differences between neutral-flexion and flexion-extension at the C4-C5, C5-C6, C6-C7, and C7-T1 levels (p < 0.01). The mean spinal canal AP diameter showed significant differences between flexion-extension and neutral-extension at the C3-C4, C4-C5, C5-C6, and C6-C7 levels (p < 0.05). There were significant differences between neutral-flexion at the C4-C5, C5-C6, and C6-C7 levels (p < 0.05). The mean thickness of the ligamentum flavum showed significant differences between flexion-extension at the C3-C4, C4-C5, C5-C6, and C6-C7 levels (p < 0.001). There were significant differences between neutral-extension at the C3-C4 and C5-C6 levels (p < 0.05). There were significant differences between neutral-flexion at the C5-C6 and C6-C7 levels (p < 0.05). The mean thickness of the spinal cord showed significant differences between neutral-flexion at the C2-C3 and C3-C4 levels (p < 0.05). There were significant differences between flexion-extension at the C3-C4 and C4-C5 levels (p < 0.01). The rest of the canal showed significant differences between neutral-extension and flexion-extension at the C3-C4, C4-C5, C5-C6, and C6-C7 levels (p < 0.005). There were significant differences between neutral-flexion at the C5-C6 and C6-C7 levels (p < 0.01). Conclusions The occupancy of each structure in the cervical spine for each level was revealed by this study. In addition, the dynamic changes in the cervical spine with flexion and extension were seen to have different characteristics for each level.

Project description:BackgroundThe 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.MethodsTen 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.ResultsThe 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.ConclusionsC5/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.

Dataset Information

Biomechanics of the upper cervical spine ligaments in axial rotation and flexion-extension: Considerations into the clinical framework.

Publications

Biomechanics of the upper cervical spine ligaments in axial rotation and flexion-extension: Considerations into the clinical framework.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets