Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
4.0
3.8
Journals
Bioengineering
Special Issues
Spine Biomechanics
share announcement

Spine Biomechanics

A special issue of Bioengineering (ISSN 2306-5354). This special issue belongs to the section "Biomechanics and Sports Medicine".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: 30 December 2024 | Viewed by 1299

Special Issue Editor

Dr. Christian Liebsch

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Institute of Orthopaedic Research and Biomechanics, Centre for Trauma Research Ulm, Ulm University Medical Centre, Ulm, Germany
Interests: biomechanics; in vitro experiments; thoracic spine; lumbar spine; rib cage; intervertebral disc; degeneration; fractures

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

The spine represents the central musculoskeletal element of the human body, simultaneously enabling trunk movement, upright posture, and load transfer from the upper to the lower body. Consequently, the spine must withstand a variety of forces and moments and exhibit unique material properties and kinematics. However, the fundamental importance of the spine for human biomechanics is also accompanied by multiple musculoskeletal spinal pathologies, and spine-related pain is one of the main causes of disability worldwide. A more detailed knowledge of spinal biomechanics is therefore essential with regard to the prevention and treatment of musculoskeletal spinal diseases.

This Special Issue of Bioengineering on the theme of spine biomechanics aims to collate new findings and developments in biomechanical research of the spine. This comprises, but is not limited to, the following areas:

  • In vivo (clinical) trials, in vitro studies, and numerical modeling studies on the spine.
  • Design and validation of novel research methodologies for spinal biomechanics.
  • Biomechanical investigation of novel technologies and devices for the orthopedic and traumatological treatment of the spine.
  • Studies on the effects of influencing factors on spinal biomechanics, such as aging, degeneration, and trauma.

Dr. Christian Liebsch
Guest Editor

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Bioengineering is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2700 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • biomechanics
  • spine
  • intervertebral disc
  • experiment
  • modeling
  • in vivo
  • in vitro
  • in silico

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

  • Ease of navigation: Grouping papers by topic helps scholars navigate broad scope journals more efficiently.
  • Greater discoverability: Special Issues support the reach and impact of scientific research. Articles in Special Issues are more discoverable and cited more frequently.
  • Expansion of research network: Special Issues facilitate connections among authors, fostering scientific collaborations.
  • External promotion: Articles in Special Issues are often promoted through the journal's social media, increasing their visibility.
  • e-Book format: Special Issues with more than 10 articles can be published as dedicated e-books, ensuring wide and rapid dissemination.

Further information on MDPI's Special Issue polices can be found here.

Published Papers (3 papers)

Download All Papers
Order results
Result details
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

13 pages, 4257 KiB  
Article
Evaluation of Load on Cervical Disc Prosthesis by Imposing Complex Motion: Multiplanar Motion and Combined Rotational–Translational Motion
by Hossein Ansaripour, Stephen J. Ferguson and Markus Flohr
Bioengineering 2024, 11(8), 857; https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering11080857 (registering DOI) - 22 Aug 2024
Abstract
(1) Background: The kinematic characteristics of disc prosthesis undergoing complex motion are not well understood. Therefore, examining complex motion may provide an improved understanding of the post-operative behavior of spinal implants. (2) Methods: The aim of this study was to develop kinematic tests [...] Read more.
(1) Background: The kinematic characteristics of disc prosthesis undergoing complex motion are not well understood. Therefore, examining complex motion may provide an improved understanding of the post-operative behavior of spinal implants. (2) Methods: The aim of this study was to develop kinematic tests that simulate multiplanar motion and combined rotational–translational motion in a disc prosthesis. In this context, five generic zirconia-toughened alumina (BIOLOX®delta, CeramTec, Germany) ball and socket samples were tested in a 6 DOF spine simulator under displacement control with an axial compressive force of 100 N in five motion modes: (1) flexion–extension (FE = ± 7.5°), (2) lateral bending (LB = ± 6°), (3) combined FE-LB (4) combined FE and anteroposterior translation (AP = 3 mm), and (5) combined LB and lateral motion (3 mm). For combined rotational–translational motion, two scenarios were analyzed: excessive translational movement after sample rotation (scenario 1) and excessive translational movement during rotation (scenario 2). (3) Results: For combined FE-LB, the resultant forces and moments were higher compared to the unidirectional motion modes. For combined rotational–translational motion (scenario 1), subluxation occurred at FE = 7.5° with an incremental increase in AP translation = 1.49 ± 0.18 mm, and LB = 6° with an incremental increase of lateral translation = 2.22 ± 0.16 mm. At the subluxation point, the incremental increase in AP force and lateral force were 30.4 ± 3.14 N and 40.8 ± 2.56 N in FE and LB, respectively, compared to the forces at the same angles during unidirectional motion. For scenario 2, subluxation occurred at FE = 4.93° with an incremental increase in AP translation = 1.75 mm, and LB = 4.52° with an incremental increase in lateral translation = 1.99 mm. At the subluxation point, the incremental increase in AP force and lateral force were 39.17 N and 38.94 N in FE and LB, respectively, compared to the forces in the same angles during the unidirectional motion. (4) Conclusions: The new test protocols improved the understanding of in vivo-like behavior from in vitro testing. Simultaneous translation–rotation motion was shown to provoke subluxation at lower motion extents. Following further validation of the proposed complex motion testing, these new methods can be applied future development and characterization of spinal motion-preserving implants. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Spine Biomechanics)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

12 pages, 10066 KiB  
Article
Primary Stability of Kyphoplasty in Incomplete Vertebral Body Burst Fractures in Osteoporosis: A Biomechanical Investigation
by Oliver Riesenbeck, Niklas Czarnowski, Michael Johannes Raschke, Simon Oeckenpöhler and René Hartensuer
Bioengineering 2024, 11(8), 798; https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering11080798 - 7 Aug 2024
Viewed by 404
Abstract
Background: The objective of our study was to biomechanically evaluate the use of kyphoplasty to stabilize post-traumatic segmental instability in incomplete burst fractures of the vertebrae. Methods: The study was performed on 14 osteoporotic spine postmortem samples (Th11–L3). First, acquisition of the native [...] Read more.
Background: The objective of our study was to biomechanically evaluate the use of kyphoplasty to stabilize post-traumatic segmental instability in incomplete burst fractures of the vertebrae. Methods: The study was performed on 14 osteoporotic spine postmortem samples (Th11–L3). First, acquisition of the native multisegmental kinematics in our robot-based spine tester with three-dimensional motion analysis was set as a baseline for each sample. Then, an incomplete burst fracture was generated in the vertebral body L1 with renewed kinematic testing. After subsequent kyphoplasty was performed on the fractured vertebral body, primary stability was examined again. Results: Initially, a significant increase in the range of motion after incomplete burst fracture generation in all three directions of motion (extension–flexion, lateral tilt, axial rotation) was detected as proof of post-traumatic instability. There were no significant changes to the native state in the adjacent segments. Radiologically, a significant loss of height in the fractured vertebral body was also shown. Traumatic instability was significantly reduced by kyphoplasty. However, native kinematics were not restored. Conclusions: Although post-traumatic segmental instability was significantly reduced by kyphoplasty in our in vitro model, native kinematics could not be reconstructed, and significant instability remained. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Spine Biomechanics)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

18 pages, 4509 KiB  
Article
Biomechanical Comparisons between One- and Two-Compartment Devices for Reconstructing Vertebrae by Kyphoplasty
by Oliver Riesenbeck, Niklas Czarnowski, Michael Johannes Raschke, Simon Oeckenpöhler and René Hartensuer
Bioengineering 2024, 11(8), 795; https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering11080795 - 5 Aug 2024
Viewed by 512
Abstract
Background: This biomechanical in vitro study compared two kyphoplasty devices for the extent of height reconstruction, load-bearing capacity, cement volume, and adjacent fracture under cyclic loading. Methods: Multisegmental (T11–L3) specimens were mounted into a testing machine and subjected to compression, creating an incomplete [...] Read more.
Background: This biomechanical in vitro study compared two kyphoplasty devices for the extent of height reconstruction, load-bearing capacity, cement volume, and adjacent fracture under cyclic loading. Methods: Multisegmental (T11–L3) specimens were mounted into a testing machine and subjected to compression, creating an incomplete burst fracture of L1. Kyphoplasty was performed using a one- or two-compartment device. Then, the testing machine was used for a cyclic loading test of load-bearing capacity to compare the two groups for the amount of applied load until failure and subsequent adjacent fracture. Results: Vertebral body height reconstruction was effective for both groups but not statistically significantly different. After cyclic loading, refracture of vertebrae that had undergone kyphoplasty was not observed in any specimen, but fractures were observed in adjacent vertebrae. The differences between the numbers of cycles and of loads were not statistically significant. An increase in cement volume was strongly correlated with increased risks of adjacent fractures. Conclusion: The two-compartment device was not substantially superior to the one-compartment device. The use of higher cement volume correlated with the occurrence of adjacent fractures. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Spine Biomechanics)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
 
Displaying articles 1-3
Back to TopTop