Download PDF
Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2003; 16(01): 44-49
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1632753
Original Research
Schattauer GmbH

Comparison of porcine and human lumbar spine flexion mechanics*

J. P. Dickey
1   Department of Human Biology and Nutritional Sciences, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada
,
G. A. Dumas
2   Department of Mechanical Engineering, Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada
,
D. A. Bednar
3   Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
› Author AffiliationsThis work was funded by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada. We would like to acknowledge the special assistance of Michael Pierrynowski and the McMaster University Human Movement Laboratory. Thanks to: Jacek Cholewicki, Peter Cripton and Thomas Oxland for assistance with the aspects of the apparatus design and evaluation, to the Anatomy Programme at McMaster University, and to Glenn Oomen for drawing the apparatus.
* Sources of Support: Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
Further Information

Publication History

Received 03 April 2002

Accepted 31 July 2002

Publication Date:
08 February 2018 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Summary

Animal models have been proposed as an alternative to human spinal specimens for in vitro mechanical testing due to the limited availability, poor reproducibility, high cost, and potential health risk associated with human specimens. The purpose of this study was to directly compare the flexion biomechanics of porcine and human lumbar spines. We determined the range of motion, laxity zone and the stiffness under pure-moment flexion loading. The porcine and human specimens showed qualitative similarities in mechanical behaviour. However the porcine specimens demonstrated a number of quantitative differences including a less-stiff, more extensive, low-stiffness region around the neutral position and a larger flexion range of motion. The results suggest that the porcine lumbar spine may be a potential model for the human lumbar spine for certain in vitro mechanical tests including comparisons between spinal fixation constructs.

Keywords

Biomechanics - animal model - porcine - human - comparative mechanics - spine - lumbar spine
 

  • References

  • 1 Adams MA. Mechanical Testing of the Spine - An Appraisal of Methodology, Results, and Conclusions. Spine 1995; 20: 2151-6.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Adams MA, Dolan P. A Technique for Quantifying the Bending Moment Acting on the Lumbar Spine In Vivo. J Biomech 1991; 24: 117-26.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Asazuma T, Stokes IAF, Moreland MS, Suzuki N. Intersegmental Spinal Flexibility with Lumbosacral Instrumentation - An in Vitro Biomechanical Investigation. Spine 1990; 15: 1153-8.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Ashman RB, Bechtold JE, Edwards WT, Johnston CE, McAfee PC, Tencer AF. In Vitro Spinal Arthrodesis Implant Mechanical Testing Protocols. J Spinal Disord 1989; 02: 274-81.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Berne D, Goubier JN, Lemoine J, Saillant G. The aging of the spine. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 1999; 09: 125-33.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Callaghan JP, McGill SM. Intervertebral disc herniation: studies on a porcine model exposed to highly repetitive flexion/extension motion with compressive force. Clin Biomech 2001; 16: 28-37.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Cotterill PC, Kostuik JP, D’Angelo G, Fernie GR, Maki BE. An Anatomical Comparison of the Human and Bovine Thoracolumbar Spine. J Orthop Res 1986; 04: 298-303.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Crawford NR, Brankley AGU, Dickman CA, Koeneman EJ. An Apparatus for Applying Pure Nonconstraining Moments to Spine Segments In Vitro. Spine 1995; 20: 2097-100.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Crawford NR, Peles JD, Dickman CA. The Spinal Lax Zone and Neutral Zone: Measurement Techniques and Parameter Comparisons. J Spinal Disord 1998; 11: 416-29.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Dhillon N, Bass EC, Lotz JC. Effect of frozen storage on the creep behavior of human intervertebral discs. Spine 2001; 26: 883-8.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Dickey JP, Dumas GA, Hewlett BR, Bednar DA. Quantitative morphology of the human and porcine mid-lumbar interspinous ligament. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2002; 15: 150-7.
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Dickey JP, Kerr DJ. Effect of specimen length: Are the mechanics of individual motion segments comparable in functional spinal units and multisegment specimens?. Med Eng Phys. 2002 (In Press)
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Dickman CA, Crawford NR, Tominaga T, Brantley AGU, Coons S, Sonntag VKH. Morphology and Kinematics of the Baboon Upper Cervical Spine - A Model of the Atlantoaxial Complex. Spine 1994; 19: 2518-23.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Fujiwara A, Lim TH, An HS, Tanaka N, Jeon CH, Andersson GB. et al. The effect of disc degeneration and facet joint osteoarthritis on the segmental flexibility of the lumbar spine. Spine 2000; 25: 3036-44.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Galante JO. Tensile Properties of the Human Lumbar Annulus Fibrosus. Acta Orthop Scand 1967; (Suppl. 100) 1-91.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Goel VK, Clark CR, Gallaes K, Liu YK. Moment-Rotation Relationships of the Ligamentous Occipito-Atlanto-Axial Complex. J Biomech 1988; 21: 673-780.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Goel VK, Goyal S, Clark C, Nishiyama K, Nye T. Kinematics of the Whole Lumbar Spine -Effect of Discectomy. Spine 1985; 10: 543-54.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Goel VK, Voo LM, Weinstein JN, Liu YK, Okuma T, Njus GO. Response of the Ligamentous Lumbar Spine to Cyclic Bending Loads. Spine 1988; 13: 294-300.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Grauer JN, Erulkar JS, Patel TC, Panjabi MM. Biomechanical evaluation of the New Zealand white rabbit lumbar spine: a physiologic characterization. Eur Spine J 2000; 09: 250-5.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Heylings DJA. Supraspinous and Interspinous Ligaments in Dog, Cat and Baboon. J Anat 1980; 130: 223-8.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Jiang H, Moreau M, Raso VJ, Russell G, Bagnall K. A Comparison of Spinal Ligaments - Differences Between Bipeds and Quadrupeds. J Anat 1995; 187: 85-91.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Kandziora F, Pflugmacher R, Scholz M, Schnake K, Lucke M, Schroder R. et al. Comparison between sheep and human cervical spines: an anatomic, radiographic, bone mineral density, and biomechanical study. Spine 2001; 26: 1028-1037.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Kettler A, Wilke HJ, Haid C, Claes L. Effects of Specimen Length on the Monosegmental Motion Behavior of the Lumbar Spine. Spine 2000; 25: 543-50.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 24 Kumar N, Kukreti S, Ishaque M, Mulholland R. Anatomy of deer spine and its comparison to the human spine. Anat Rec 2000; 260: 189-203.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 25 Kumar N, Kukreti S, Ishaque M, Sengupta DK, Mulholland RC. Functional anatomy of the deer spine: An appropriate biomechanical model for the human spine?. Anat Rec 2002; 266: 108-17.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 26 Lysack JT, Dickey JP, Dumas GA, Yen D. A Continuous Pure Moment Loading Apparatus for Biomechanical Testing of Multi-Segment Spine Specimens. J Biomech 2000; 33: 765-70.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 27 Lysack JT, Yen D, Dumas GA. In vitro flexibility of an experimental pedicle screw and plate instrumentation system on the porcine lumbar spine. Med Eng Phys 2000; 22: 461-8.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 28 Mimura M, Panjabi MM, Oxland TR, Crisco JJ, Yamamoto I, Vasavada A. Disc Degeneration Affects the Multidirectional Flexibility of the Lumbar Spine. Spine 1994; 19: 1371-80.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 29 Oxland tR, Lund T, Jost B, Cripton P, Lippuner K, Jaeger P. et al. The relative importance of vertebral bone density and disc degeneration in spinal flexibility and interbody implant performance. An in vitro study. Spine 1996; 21: 2558-69.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 30 Oxland TR, Panjabi MM, Southern EP, Duranceau JS. An Anatomic Basis for Spinal Instability: A Porcine Trauma Model. J Orthop Res 1991; 09: 452-62.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 31 Panjabi MM. The Stabilizing System of the Spine. Part I. Function, Dysfunction, Adaptation, and Enhancement. J Spinal Disord 1992; 05: 383-9.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 32 Panjabi MM, Goel V, Oxland T, Takata K, Duranceau J, Krag M. et al. Human lumbar vertebrae. Quantitative three-dimensional anatomy. Spine 1992; 17: 299-306.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 33 Panjabi MM, Krag M, Summers D, Videman T. Biomechanical Time-Tolerance of Fresh Cadaveric Human Spine Specimens. J Orthop Res 1985; 03: 292-300.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 34 Rissanen PM. The Surgical Anatomy and Pathology of the Supraspinous and Interspinous Ligaments of the Lumbar Spine with Special Reference to Ligament Ruptures. Acta Orthop Scand 1960; [Suppl] 46: 1-100.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 35 Smit TH. The use of a quadruped as an in vivo model for the study of the spine - biomechanical considerations. Eur Spine J 2002; 11: 137-44.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 36 Stokes IA, Gardner-Morse M, Churchill D, Laible JP. Measurement of a spinal motion segment stiffness matrix. J Biomech 2002; 35: 517-21.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 37 Tanaka N, An HS, Lim TH, Fujiwara A, Jeon CH, Haughton VM. The relationship between disc degeneration and flexibility of the lumbar spine. The Spine J 2001; 01: 47-56.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 38 Tencer AF, Hampton D, Eddy S. Biomechanical Properties of Threaded Inserts for Lumbar Interbody Spinal Fusion. Spine 1995; 20: 2408-14.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 39 Terk MR, Hume-Neal M, Fraipont M, Ahmadi J, Colletti PM. Injury of the posterior ligament complex in patients with acute spinal trauma: evaluation by MR imaging. Am J Roentgenol 1997; 168: 1481-6.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 40 Twomey L. The Effects of Age on the Ranges of Motions of the Lumbar Region. Australian Journal of Physiotherapy 1979; 25: 257-63.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 41 Wilke HJ, Jungkunz B, Wenger K, Claes LE. Spinal segment range of motion as a function of in vitro test conditions: effects of exposure period, accumulated cycles, angular-deformation rate, and moisture condition. Anat Rec 1998; 251: 15-9.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 42 Wilke HJ, Kettler A, Claes LE. Are sheep spines a valid biomechanical model for human spines?. Spine 1997; 22: 2365-74.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 43 Wilke HJ, Kettler A, Wenger KH, Claes LE. Anatomy of the Sheep Spine and Its Comparison to the Human Spine. Anat Rec 1997; 247: 542-55.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 44 Wilke HJ, Krischak S, Claes L. Biomechanical Comparison of Calf and Human Spines. J Orthop Res 1996; 14: 500-3.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 45 Wilke HJ, Krischak S, Claes LE. Formalin Fixation Strongly Influences Biomechanical Properties of the Spine. J Biomech 1996; 29: 1629-31.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 46 Wilke HJ, Krischak ST, Wenger KH, Claes LE. Load-Displacement Properties of the Thoracolumbar Calf Spine: Experimental Results and Comparison to Known Human Data. Eur Spine J 1997; 06: 129-37.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 47 Wu G, Siegler S, Allard P, Kirtley C, Leardini A, Whittle M. et al. ISB recommendation on definitions of joint coordinate system of various joints for the reporting of human joint motionpart I: ankle, hip, and spine. J Biomech 2002; 35: 543-8.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 48 Yingling VR, Callaghan JP, McGill SM. The porcine cervical spine as a model of the human lumbar spine: an anatomical, geometric, and functional comparison. J Spinal Disord 1999; 12: 415-23.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 49 Yoganandan N, Cusick JF, Pintar FA, Droese K, Voo L. An Experimental Technique to Induce and Quantify Complex Cyclic Forces to the Lumbar Spine. Neurosurgery 1995; 36: 956-64.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar