Abstract
The study consists of a biomechanical comparison between the intact C5–C6 spinal segment and the same segment implanted with the BryanTM artificial disc prosthesis (Medtronic Ltd., Memphis, TN, USA), by the use of the finite element (FE) method. Our target is the prediction of the influence of prosthesis placement on the resulting mechanics of the C5–C6 spine unit. A FE model of the intact C5–C6 segment was built, employing realistic models of the vertebrae, disc and ligaments. Simulations were conducted imposing a compression preload combined to a flexion/extension moment, a pure lateral bending moment and a pure torsion moment, and the calculated results were compared to data from literature. The model was then modified to include the BryanTM cervical disc prosthesis, and the simulations were repeated. The location of the instantaneous center of rotation (ICR) of C5 with respect to C6 throughout flexion/extension was calculated in both models. In general, the moment–rotation curves obtained from the disc prosthesis-implanted model were comparable to the curves obtained from the intact model, except for a slightly greater stiffness induced by the artificial disc. The position of the calculated ICRs was rather stable throughout flexion-extension and was generally confined to a small area, qualitatively matching the corresponding physiological region, in both models. These results imply that the BryanTM disc prosthesis allows to correctly reproduce a physiological flexion/extension at the implanted level. The results of this study have quantified aspects that may assist in optimizing cervical disc replacement primarily from a biomechanical point of view.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Amevo B, Worth D, Bogduk N (1991) Instantaneous axes of rotation of the typical cervical motion segments: a study in normal volunteers. Clin Biomech 6:111–117
Anderson PA, Rouleau JP (2004) Intervertebral disc arthroplasty. Spine 29:2779–2786
Anderson PA, Sasso RC, Rouleau JP et al. (2004). The Bryan cervical disc: wear properties and early clinical results. Spine J 4(6 Suppl):303S–309S
Bogduk N, Mercer S (2000) Biomechanics of the cervical spine. I: Normal kinematics. Clin Biomech 15(9):633–648
DiAngelo DJ, Roberston JT, Metcalf NH et al. (2003) Biomechanical testing of an artificial cervical joint and an anterior cervical plate. J Spinal Disord Tech 16(4):314–323
Duggal N, Pickett GE, Mitsis DK et al. (2004) Early clinical and biomechanical results following cervical arthroplasty. Neurosurg Focus 17(3):E9
Goel VK, Clausen JD (1998) Prediction of load sharing among spinal components of a C5-C6 motion segment using the finite element approach. Spine 23(6):684–691
Goffin J, Van Calenbergh F, van Loon J et al. (2003) Intermediate follow-up after treatment of degenerative disc disease with the Bryan cervical disc prosthesis: single-level and bi-level. Spine 28(24):2673–2678
Hilibrand AS, Robbins M (2004) Adjacent segment degeneration and adjacent segment disease: the consequences of spinal fusion. Spine J 4:190S–194S
Hosey RR, Liu YK (1982). A homeomorphic finite element model of the human head and neck. In: Gallagher RH, Simon BR, Johnson PC, Gross JF (eds). Finite elements in biomechanics. Wiley, New York, pp 379–401
Johnson JP, Lauryssen C, Cambron HO et al. (2004) Sagittal alignment and the Bryan cervical artificial disc. Neurosurg Focus 17(6):E14
Kumaresan S, Yoganandan N, Pintar FA (1998) Finite element modeling approaches of human cervical spine facet joint capsule. J Biomech 31(4):371–376
Lu YM, Hutton WC, Gharpuray VM (1998) The effect of fluid loss on the viscoelastic behavior of the lumbar intervertebral disc in compression. J Biomech Eng 120(1):48–54
Maurel N, Lavaste F, Skalli W (1997) A three-dimensional parameterised finite element model of the lower cervical spine. Study of the influence of the posterior articular facets. J Biomech 30(9):921–931
McAfee PC, Cunningham B, Dmitriev A et al. (2003) Cervical disc replacement-porous coated motion prosthesis: a comparative biomechanical analysis showing the key role of the posterior longitudinal ligament. Spine 28(20):S176–S185
Moroney SP, Schultz AB, Miller JAA, Andersson GBJ (1988) Load-displacement properties of lower cervical spine motion segments. J Biomech 21:767–779
Pelker RR, Duranceau JS, Panjabi MM (1991) Cervical spine stabilization. A three-dimensional, biomechanical evaluation of rotational stability, strength, and failure mechanisms. Spine 16(2):117–122
Penning L (1988) Differences in anatomy, motion, development and aging of the upper and lower cervical disk segments. Clin Biomech 3:37–47
Pickett GE, Mitsis DK, Sekhon LH et al. (2004) Effects of a cervical disc prosthesis on segmental and cervical spine alignment. Neurosurg Focus 17(3):E5
Pitzen TR, Matthis D, Barbier DD et al. (2002) Initial stability of cervical spine fixation: predictive value of a finite element model. Technical note. J Neurosurg Spine 97(1):128–134
Rohlmann A, Zander T, Schmidt H, Wilke HJ, Bergmann G (2005) Analysis of the influence of disc degeneration on the mechanical behaviour of a lumbar motion segment using the finite element method. J Biomech (in press)
Smith HE, Wimberley DW, Vaccaro AR (2004) Cervical arthroplasty: material properties. Neurosurg Focus 17(3):E3
Teo EC, Ng HW (2001) Evaluation of the role of ligaments, facets and disc nucleus in lower cervical spine under compression and sagittal moments using finite element method. Med Eng Phys 23:155–164
Teo EC, Yang K, Fuss FK et al. (2004) Effects of cervical cages on load distribution of cancellous core: a finite element analysis. J Spinal Disord Tech 17(3):226–231
Yin L, Elliott DM (2005) A homogenization model of the annulus fibrosus. J Biomech 38(8):1674–1684
Yoganandan N, Kumaresan SC, Liming Voo et al. (1996) Finite element modeling of the C4-C6 cervical spine unit. Med Eng Phys 18(7):569–574
Yoganandan N, Kumaresan SC, Pintar FA (2000) Geometric and mechanical properties of human cervical spine ligaments. J Biomech Eng 122(6):623–629
Yoganandan N, Kumaresan SC, Pintar FA (2001) Biomechanics of the cervical spine Part 2. Cervical spine soft tissue responses and biomechanical modeling. Clin Biomech 16:1–27
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Galbusera, F., Fantigrossi, A., Raimondi, M.T. et al. Biomechanics of the C5-C6 Spinal Unit Before and After Placement of a disc prosthesis. Biomech Model Mechanobiol 5, 253–261 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10237-006-0015-4
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10237-006-0015-4