Refine
Year of publication
- 2018 (4) (remove)
Document Type
Language
- English (4)
Has Fulltext
- no (4)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (4)
Keywords
- AnyBody Modeling System (1)
- Biomechanische Analyse (1)
- Musculoskeletal analysis (1)
- Sagittal balance (1)
- Spinal fusion (1)
- Spine biomechanics (1)
- Vergleichende Anatomie (1)
- Wirbelsäulenversteifung (1)
- crosstalk (1)
- musculoskeletal modeling (1)
Institute
The number of spinal fusion surgeries is steadily increasing and biomechanical consequences are still in debate. The aim of this study is to provide biomechanical insights into the sagittal balance of the spine and to compare spinal load before and after spinal fusion.
METHOD:
The joint reaction forces of 52 patients were analyzed in proximo-distal and antero-posterior direction from the levels T12-L1 to L5-S1 using musculoskeletal simulations.
RESULTS:
In 104 simulations, pre-surgical forces were equal to post-surgical. The levels L4-L5 and T12-L1, however, showed increased spinal forces compression forces with higher sagittal displacement. Improved restauration of sagittal balance was accompanied by lower spinal load. AP shear stress, interestingly decreased with sagittal imbalance.
CONCLUSION:
Imbalanced spines have a risk of increased compression forces at Th12-L1. L4-L5 always has increased spinal loads. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.
BACKGROUND: Validation and verification of multibody musculoskeletal models sEMG is a difficult process because of the reliability of sEMG data and the complex relationship of muscle force and sEMG. OBJECTIVE: This work aims at comparing experimentally recorded and simulated muscle activities considering a numerical model for crosstalk. METHODS: For providing an experimentally derived reference data set, subjects were performing elevations of the arm, where the activities of the contemplated muscle groups were measured by sEMG sensors. Computed muscle activities were further processed and transformed into an artificial electromyographical signal, which includes a numerical crosstalk model. In order to determine whether the crosstalk model provides a better agreement with the measured muscle activities, the Pearson correlation coefficient has been computed as a qualitative way of assessing the curve progression of the data sets. RESULTS: The results show an improvement in the correlation coefficient between the experimental data and the simulated muscle activities when taking crosstalk into account. CONCLUSIONS: Although the correlation coefficient increased when the crosstalk model was utilized, it is questionable if the discretization of both, the crosstalk and the musculoskeletal model, is accurate enough.