Yield point in prediction of compressive behavior of lumbar vertebral body by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry

The Influence of Axial Compression on the Cellular and Mechanical Function of Spinal Tissues; Emphasis on the Nucleus Pulposus and Annulus Fibrosus: A Review

In light of the correlation between chronic back pain and intervertebral disc (IVD) degeneration, this literature review seeks to illustrate the importance of the hydraulic response across the nucleus pulposus (NP)-annulus fibrosus (AF) interface, by synthesizing current information regarding injurious biomechanics of the spine, stemming from axial compression. Damage to vertebrae, endplates (EPs), the NP, and the AF, can all arise from axial compression, depending on the segment's posture, the manner in which it is loaded, and the physiological state of tissue. Therefore, this movement pattern was selected to illustrate the importance of the bracing effect of a pressurized NP on the AF, and how injuries interrupting support to the AF may contribute to IVD degeneration.

The ratio of anterior and posterior vertebral heights reinforces the utility of DXA in assessment of vertebrae strength

The objective of the study was to introduce a new parameter describing bone strength with greater precision than the widely used antero-posterior DXA (dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry), which measures areal bone mineral density (aBMD). The adjusted areal bone mineral density (AaBMD) defined as the ratio between aBMD and h a/h p (h a and h p: anterior and posterior vertebral body heights measured on the lateral view, respectively) is proposed: AaBMD = aBMD/(h a/h p). The utility of AaBMD in prediction of bone strength was assessed by in vitro measurements of cadaver L3 vertebrae. The AaBMD of 31 vertebrae was correlated with the ultimate stress (P max) and load (F max) values obtained in mechanical tests. The correlations were compared to those obtained for aBMD and for volumetric bone mineral density (vBMD) measured by computed tomography. The correlation of AaBMD to F max adjusted for donor's age was significantly higher than for aBMD and vBMD (r = 0.740, 0.658, and 0.609, respectively, p < 0.05). The differences between partial correlation coefficients for P max to AaBMD, aBMD and vBMD relationships were smaller (r = 0.764, 0.720, and 0.732, respectively, p < 0.05), but also showed the superiority of AaBMD. Combining antero-posterior DXA aBMD and the lateral h a/h p ratio, measured, for example, by the Vertebral Fracture Assessment software of the new generation of DXA devices, seems to accurately predict the mechanical vertebral parameters related to bone strength. It is assumed that the proposed AaBMD parameter may be more predictive for fracture risk assessment, which requires further studies.

Which factors prognosticate rotational instability following lumbar laminectomy?

PURPOSE

Reduced strength and stiffness of lumbar spinal motion segments following laminectomy may lead to instability. Factors that predict shear biomechanical properties of the lumbar spine were previously published. The purpose of the present study was to predict spinal torsion biomechanical properties with and without laminectomy from a total of 21 imaging parameters.

METHOD

Radiographs and MRI of ten human cadaveric lumbar spines (mean age 75.5, range 59-88 years) were obtained to quantify geometry and degeneration of the motion segments. Additionally, dual X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scans were performed to measure bone mineral content and density. Facet-sparing lumbar laminectomy was performed either on L2 or L4. Spinal motion segments were dissected (L2-L3 and L4-L5) and tested in torsion, under 1,600 N axial compression. Torsion moment to failure (TMF), early torsion stiffness (ETS, at 20-40 % TMF) and late torsion stiffness (LTS, at 60-80 % TMF) were determined and bivariate correlations with all parameters were established. For dichotomized parameters, independent-sample t tests were used.

RESULTS

Univariate analyses showed that a range of geometric characteristics and disc and bone quality parameters were associated with torsion biomechanical properties of lumbar segments. Multivariate models showed that ETS, LTS and TMF could be predicted for segments without laminectomy (r (2) values 0.693, 0.610 and 0.452, respectively) and with laminectomy (r (2) values 0.952, 0.871 and 0.932, respectively), with DXA-derived measures of bone quality and quantity as the main predictors.

CONCLUSIONS

Vertebral bone content and geometry, i.e. intervertebral disc width, frontal area and facet joint tropism, were found to be strong predictors of ETS, LTS and TMF following laminectomy, suggesting that these variables could predict the possible development of post-operative rotational instability following lumbar laminectomy. Proposed diagnostic parameters might aid surgical decision-making when deciding upon the use of instrumentation techniques.

Torsion biomechanics of the spine following lumbar laminectomy: a human cadaver study

PURPOSE

Lumbar laminectomy affects spinal stability in shear loading. However, the effects of laminectomy on torsion biomechanics are unknown. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of laminectomy on torsion stiffness and torsion strength of lumbar spinal segments following laminectomy and whether these biomechanical parameters are affected by disc degeneration and bone mineral density (BMD).

METHODS

Ten human cadaveric lumbar spines were obtained (age 75.5, range 59-88). Disc degeneration (MRI) and BMD (DXA) were assessed. Disc degeneration was classified according to Pfirrmann and dichotomized in mild or severe. BMD was defined as high BMD (≥median BMD) or low BMD (<median BMD). Laminectomy was performed either on L2 (5×) or L4 (5×). Twenty motion segments (L2-L3 and L4-L5) were isolated. The effects of laminectomy, disc degeneration and BMD on torsion stiffness (TS) and torsion moments to failure (TMF) were studied.

RESULTS

Load-displacement curves showed a typical bi-phasic pattern with an early torsion stiffness (ETS), late torsion stiffness (LTS) and a TMF. Following laminectomy, ETS decreased 34.1 % (p < 0.001), LTS decreased 30.1 % (p = 0.027) and TMF decreased 17.6 % (p = 0.041). Disc degeneration (p < 0.001) and its interaction with laminectomy (p < 0.031) did significantly affect ETS. In the mildly degenerated group, ETS decreased 19.7 % from 7.6 Nm/degree (6.4-8.4) to 6.1 Nm/degree (1.5-10.3) following laminectomy. In the severely degenerated group, ETS decreased 22.3 % from 12.1 Nm/degree (4.6-21.9) to 9.4 Nm/degree (5.6-14.3) following laminectomy. In segments with low BMD, TMF was 40.7 % (p < 0.001) lower than segments with high BMD [34.9 Nm (range 23.7-51.2) versus 58.9 Nm (range 43.8-79.2)].

CONCLUSIONS

Laminectomy affects both torsion stiffness and torsion load to failure. In addition, torsional strength is strongly affected by BMD whereas disc degeneration affects torsional stiffness. Assessment of disc degeneration and BMD pre-operatively improves the understanding of the biomechanical effects of a lumbar laminectomy.

Combining areal DXA bone mineral density and vertebrae postero-anterior width improves the prediction of vertebral strength

OBJECTIVE

Areal bone mineral density (aBMD) measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is an important determinant of bone strength (BS), despite the fact that the correlation between aBMD and BS is relatively weak. Parameters that describe BS more accurately are desired. The aim of this study was to determine whether the geometrical corrections applied to aBMD would improve its ability for BS prediction. We considered new parameters, estimated from a single DXA measurement, as well as BMAD (bone mineral apparent density) reported in the literature.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In vitro studies were performed with the L3 vertebrae from 20 cadavers, which were studied with DXA and quantitative computed tomography (QCT). A mechanical strength assessment was carried out. Two new parameters were introduced: vBMD(min) = aBMD/W(PA)(min) and vBMD(av) = aBMD/W(PA)(av) (W PA(min) -minimal vertebral body width in postero-anterior (PA) view, W(PA)(av) - average PA vertebral body width). Volumetric BMD measured by QCT (vBMD), aBMD, BMAD, vBMD(min), and vBMD(av) were correlated to ultimate load and ultimate stress (P(max)) to find the best predictor of vertebrae BS.

RESULTS

The coefficients of correlation between P(max) and vBMD(min), vBMD(av), as well as BMAD, were r = 0.626 (p = 0.005), r = 0.610 (p = 0.006) and r = 0.567 (p = 0.012), respectively. Coefficients for vBMD and aBMD are r = 0.648 (p = 0.003) and r = 0.511 (p = 0.03), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results showed that aBMD normalized by vertebrae dimensions describes vertebrae BS better than aBMD alone. The considered indices vBMD(av), vBMD(min), and BMAD can be measured in routine PA DXA and considerably improve BS variability prediction. vBMD(min) is superior compared to vBMD(av) and BMAD.

Which factors prognosticate spinal instability following lumbar laminectomy?

PURPOSE

Reduced strength and shear stiffness (SS) of lumbar motion segments following laminectomy may lead to instability. The purpose of the present study was to assess a broad range of parameters as potential predictors of shear biomechanical properties of the lumbar spine.

METHODS

Radiographs and MRI of all lumbar spines were obtained to classify geometry and degeneration of the motion segments. Additionally, dual X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scans were performed to measure bone mineral content and density (BMC and BMD). Facet sparing lumbar laminectomy was performed either on L2 or L4, in 10 human cadaveric lumbar spines (mean age 72.1 years, range 53-89 years). Spinal motion segments were dissected (L2-L3 and L4-L5) and tested in shear, under simultaneously loading with 1600 N axial compression. Shear stiffness, shear yield force (SYF) and shear force to failure (SFF) were determined and statistical correlations with all parameters were established.

RESULTS

Following laminectomy, SS, SYF, and SFF declined (by respectively 24, 41, and 44%). For segments with laminectomy, SS was significantly correlated with intervertebral disc degeneration and facet joint degeneration (Pfirrmann: r = 0.64; Griffith: r = 0.70; Lane: r = 0.73 and Pathria: r = 0.64), SYF was correlated with intervertebral disc geometry (r = 0.66 for length; r = 0.66 for surface and r = 0.68 for volume), BMC (r = 0.65) and frontal area (r = 0.75), and SFF was correlated with disc length (r = 0.73) and BMC (r = 0.81). For untreated segments, SS was significantly correlated with facet joint tropism (r = 0.71), SYF was correlated with pedicle geometry (r = 0.83), and SFF was correlated with BMC (r = 0.85), BMD (r = 0.75) and frontal area (r = 0.75). SS, SYF and SFF could be predicted for segments with laminectomy (r (2) values respectively: 0.53, 0.81 and 0.77) and without laminectomy (r (2) value respectively: 0.50, 0.83 and 0.83).

CONCLUSIONS

Significant loss of strength and SS are predicted by BMC, BMD, intervertebral disc geometry and degenerative parameters, suggesting that low BMC or BMD, small intervertebral discs and absence of osteophytes could predict the possible development of post-operative instability following lumbar laminectomy.

Development and validation of a predictive bone fracture risk model for astronauts

There are still many unknowns in the physiological response of human beings to space, but compelling evidence indicates that accelerated bone loss will be a consequence of long-duration spaceflight. Lacking phenomenological data on fracture risk in space, we have developed a predictive tool based on biomechanical and bone loading models at any gravitational level of interest. The tool is a statistical model that forecasts fracture risk, bounds the associated uncertainties, and performs sensitivity analysis. In this paper, we focused on events that represent severe consequences for an exploration mission, specifically that of spinal fracture resulting from a routine task (lifting a heavy object up to 60 kg), or a spinal, femoral or wrist fracture due to an accidental fall or an intentional jump from 1 to 2 m. We validated the biomechanical and bone fracture models against terrestrial studies of ground reaction forces, skeletal loading, fracture risk, and fracture incidence. Finally, we predicted fracture risk associated with reference missions to the moon and Mars that represented crew activities on the surface. Fracture was much more likely on Mars due to compromised bone integrity. No statistically significant gender-dependent differences emerged. Wrist fracture was the most likely type of fracture, followed by spinal and hip fracture.

Structural determinants of vertebral fracture risk

Vertebral fractures are more strongly associated with specific bone density, structure, and strength parameters than with areal BMD, but all of these variables are correlated.

INTRODUCTION

It is unclear whether the association of areal BMD (aBMD) with vertebral fracture risk depends on bone density per se, bone macro- or microstructure, overall bone strength, or spine load/bone strength ratios.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From an age-stratified sample of Rochester, MN, women, we identified 40 with a clinically diagnosed vertebral fracture (confirmed semiquantitatively) caused by moderate trauma (cases; mean age, 78.6 +/- 9.0 yr) and compared them with 40 controls with no osteoporotic fracture (mean age, 70.9 +/- 6.8 yr). Lumbar spine volumetric BMD (vBMD) and geometry were assessed by central QCT, whereas microstructure was evaluated by high-resolution pQCT at the ultradistal radius. Vertebral failure load ( approximately strength) was estimated from voxel-based finite element models, and the factor-of-risk (phi) was determined as the ratio of applied spine loads to failure load.

RESULTS

Spine loading (axial compressive force on L3) was similar in vertebral fracture cases and controls (e.g., for 90 degrees forward flexion, 2639 versus 2706 N; age-adjusted p = 0.173). However, fracture cases had inferior values for most bone density and structure variables. Bone strength measures were also reduced, and the factor-of-risk (phi) was 35-37% greater (worse) among women with a vertebral fracture. By age-adjusted logistic regression, relative risks for the strongest fracture predictor in each of the five main variable categories were bone density (total lumbar spine vBMD: OR per SD change, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.1-4.3), bone geometry (vertebral apparent cortical thickness: OR, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.1-4.1), bone microstructure (none significant); bone strength ("cortical" [outer 2 mm] compressive strength: OR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.3-4.8), and factor-of-risk (phi for 90 degrees forward flexion/overall vertebral compressive strength: OR, 3.2; 95% CI, 1.4-7.5). These variables were correlated with spine aBMD (partial r, -0.32 to 0.75), but each was a stronger predictor of fracture in the logistic regression analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

The association of aBMD with vertebral fracture risk is explained by its correlation with more specific bone density, structure, and strength parameters. These may allow deeper insights into fracture pathogenesis.