Carbajal RMF, Nieto MJJ, Rodríguez CRG, Dufoo OM, Hernández GLH, Urriolagoitia CG, Minor MA.

Language: Spanish
References: 18
Page: 155-159
PDF size: 85.23 Kb.

ABSTRACT

The intention is to determine by means of photoelasticity and Numerical Methods, as it is the distribution of stress produced in a healthy specimen when load is applied to him, and to compare it with specimens that suffer damaged in all different quadrants from the vertebral disc. This way, it is possible to be established in which degree contributes the vertebral disc in the transmission and distribution of load. This study was made with numerical-experimental analysis, with the purpose of validating the obtained results. The experimental part was made by means of the reflection photoelastic technique of, whereas the numerical part was made using the package of finite elements ANSYS (version 7.0). the first week.

REFERENCES

1. Argoubi M, Shirazi-Adl A: poroelastic creep response analysis of a lumbar motion segment in compression. J Biomech 1996; (29)10: 1331-1339.

2. Brown T, Hanson RJ, Yorra AJ: Some mechanical test on the lumbosacral spine with particular reference to the intervertebral disc. J Bone Joint Surg 1957; 39A(5): 1135-1164.

3. Calisse J, Rohlmann A, Bergmann G: Estimation of trunk muscle forces using the finite element method and in vivo loads measured by telemeterized internal spinal fixation devices. J Biomech 1999; 32(7): 727-731.

4. Ebara SE, Iatridis JC, Setton LA, Foster LJ, Mow VC, Weinderbaum M: Tensile Properties of nondegenerate human lumbar anulus fibrosus. Spine 1996; (21)4: 452-461.

5. Ford CM, Keaveny TM: The dependence of shear failure properties of trabecular bone on apparent density and trabecular orientation. J Biomech 1996; (29)10: 1309-1317.

6. Frei H, Oxland TR, Rathonyi GC, Nolte LP: The effect of nucleotomy on lumbar spine mechanics in compression and shear loading. Spine 2001; (26)19: 2080-2089.

7. Hirsch C, Nachemson A: New observation on the mechanical behavior of lumbar disc. Acta Orthop Scand 1954; 23(4): 254-183.

8. Hirsch C: The mechanical response in normal and degenerated lumbar disc. J Bone Joint Surg 1956; 38A: 242.

9. Hirsch C: The reaction of intervertebral disc to compression forces. J Bone Joint Surg 1955; 37A(6): 1188-1196.

10. Hongo M, Abe E, Shimada Y, Murai H, Ishikawa N, Sato K: Surface strain distribution on thoracic and lumbar vertebrae under axial compression. The role in burst fractures. Spine 1999; (24)12: 1197-1202.

11. Kaigle A, Ekstrom L, Holm S, Rostedt M, Hansson T: In Vivo dynamic stiffness of the porcine lumbar spine exposed to cyclic loading: influence of load and degeneration. J Spinal Disorders 1998; (11)1: 65-70.

12. Kirkaldy-Willis WH, Wedge JH, Yong-Hing K, Reilly J: Pathology and pathogenesis of lumbar spondylosis and stenosis. Spine 1978; 3(4): 319-328.

13. Lee CK, Kim YE, Lee CS, Hong YM, Jung JM, Goel VK: Impact response of the intervertebral disc in a finite element model. Spine 2000; 25(19): 2431-2439.

14. Liu XC, Fabry G, Labey L, Van den Berghe L, Van Audekercke R, Molenaers G, Moens P: A New Technique for the three-dimensional study of the spine in vitro and in vivo by using a motion-analysis system. J Spinal Disorders 1997; 10(4): 329-338.

15. Lu YM, Hutton WC, Gharpuray VM: The effect of fluid loss on the viscoelastic intervertebral disc in compression. J Biomech Eng 1998; 120(1): 48-54.

16. Markolf KL, Morris JM: The structural components of the intervertebral disc. A study of their contributions to the ability of the disc to withstand compressive forces. J Bone Joint Surg 1974; 56(4): 675-687.

17. Sharma M, Langrana NA, Rodríguez J: Modeling of facet articulation as a nonlinear moving contact problem: sensitivity study on lumbar facet response. J Biomech Eng 1998; 120(1): 118-125.

18. Wang JL, Panjabi MM, Kato Y, et al: Radiography cannot examine disc injuries secondary to burst fracture: quantitative discomanometry validation. Spine 2002; 27(3); 235-240.