Top

02-05-2024 | Original Article

Simulative investigation of the required level of geometrical individualization of the lumbar spines to predict fractures

Authors: Laura Kathrin Rieger, Mirko Junge, Rachel Cutlan, Steffen Peldschus, Brian D. Stemper

Published in: International Journal of Legal Medicine

Abstract

Injury mechanisms of the lumbar spine under dynamic loading are dependent on spine curvature and anatomical variation. Impact simulation with finite element (FE) models can assist the reconstruction and prediction of injuries. The objective of this study was to determine which level of individualization of a baseline FE lumbar spine model is necessary to replicate experimental responses and fracture locations in a dynamic experiment.

Experimental X-rays from 26 dynamic drop tower tests were used to create three configurations of a lumbar spine model (T12 to L5): baseline, with aligned vertebrae (positioned), and with aligned and morphed vertebrae (morphed). Each model was simulated with the corresponding loading and boundary conditions from dynamic lumbar spine experiments. Force, moment, and kinematic responses were compared to the experimental data. Cosine similarity was computed to assess how well simulation responses match the experimental data. The pressure distribution within the vertebrae was used to compare fracture risk and fracture location between the different models.

The positioned models replicated the injured spinal level and the fracture patterns quite well, though the morphed models provided slightly more accuracy. However, for impact reconstruction or injury prediction, the authors recommend pure positioning for whole-body models, as the gain in accuracy was relatively small, while the morphing modifications of the model require considerably higher efforts. These results improve the understanding of the application of human body models to investigate lumbar injury mechanisms with FE models.

Available only for authorised users

Leucht P, Fischer K, Muhr G et al (2009) Epidemiology of traumatic spine fractures. Injury 40(2):166–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2008.06.040CrossRefPubMed

Pintar FA, Yoganandan N, Maiman DJ et al (2012) Thoracolumbar spine fractures in frontal impact crashes. Ann Adv Automot Med (56): 277–283

Wang MC, Pintar FA, Yoganandan N et al (2009) The continued burden of spine fractures after motor vehicle crashes. J Neurosurg Spine 10:86–92. https://doi.org/10.3171/SPI.2008.10.08279CrossRefPubMed

Rao RD, Berry CA, Yoganandan N et al (2014) Occupant and crash characteristics in thoracic and lumbar spine injuries resulting from motor vehicle collisions. Spine J 14(10):2355–2365. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2014.01.038CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Jorlöv S, Bohman K, Larsson A (2017) Seating positions and activities in highly automated cars – a qualitative study of future automated driving scenarios. In: Proceedings of the IRCOBI Conference, pp 13–22

Östling M, Jeppsson H, Lubbe N (2019) Predicting crash configurations in passenger car to passenger car crashes to guide the development of future passenger car safety. In: Proceedings of the IRCOBI Conference, pp 626–643

Richardson R, Donlon J-P, Jayathirtha M et al (2020) Kinematic and injury response of reclined PMHS in frontal impacts. Stapp Car Crash J 64:83–153. https://doi.org/10.4271/2020-22-0004CrossRefPubMed

Kaufman RP, Ching RP, Willis MM et al (2013) Burst fractures of the lumbar spine in frontal crashes. Accid Anal Prev 59:153–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2013.05.023CrossRefPubMed

Niemeyer F, Wilke H-J, Schmidt H (2012) Geometry strongly influences the response of numerical models of the lumbar spine–a probabilistic finite element analysis. J Biomech 45(8):1414–1423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2012.02.021CrossRefPubMed

10.

Thacker BH, Wu Y-T, Nicolella DP et al (1997) Probabilistic injury analysis of the cervical spine. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc., pp 2093–2103. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1997-1135

11.

Putzer M, Ehrlich I, Rasmussen J et al (2016) Sensitivity of lumbar spine loading to anatomical parameters. J Biomech 49(6):953–958. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2015.11.003CrossRefPubMed

12.

Meijer GJM, Homminga J, Veldhuizen AG et al (2011) Influence of interpersonal geometrical variation on spinal motion segment stiffness: implications for patient-specific modeling. Spine 36(14):929–935. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181fd7f7fCrossRef

13.

Izumiyama T, Nishida N, Iwanaga H et al (2018) The analysis of an individual difference in human skeletal alignment in seated posture and occupant behavior using HBMs. In: Proceedings of the IRCOBI Conference, pp 549–560

14.

Izumiyama T, Nishida N, Yamagata H et al (2022) Analysis of individual variabilities for lumbar and pelvic alignment in highly reclined seating postures and occupant kinematics in a collision. In: Proceedings of the IRCOBI Conference, pp 941–955

15.

Sato F, Miyazaki Y, Morikawa S et al (2021) The effect of seat back inclination on spinal alignment in automotive seating postures. Front Bioeng Biotechnol 9:1–17. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2021.684043CrossRef

16.

Zhang K, Cao L, Fanta A et al (2017) An automated method to morph finite element whole-body human models with a wide range of stature and body shape for both men and women. J Biomech 60:253–260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2017.06.015CrossRefPubMed

17.

Beillas P, Berthet F (2017) An investigation of human body model morphing for the assessment of abdomen responses to impact against a population of test subjects. Traffic Inj Prev 18(Suppl 1):142–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/15389588.2017.1307971CrossRef

18.

Shi X, Cao L, Reed MP et al (2014) A statistical human rib cage geometry model accounting for variations by age, sex, stature and body mass index. J Biomech 47(10):2277–2285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2014.04.045CrossRefPubMed

19.

O’Cain CM, Gepner BD, Spratley EM et al (2019) Pipeline for specimen specific bone-ligament-cartilage finite element models. Proceedings of Ohio State University Injury Biomechanics Symposium: 1–6

20.

Stemper BD, Chirvi S, Doan N et al (2018) Biomechanical tolerance of whole lumbar spines in straightened posture subjected to axial acceleration. J Orthop Res 36(6):1747–1756. https://doi.org/10.1002/jor.23826CrossRefPubMed

21.

Mattucci SFE, Moulton JA, Chandrashekar N et al (2012) Strain rate dependent properties of younger human cervical spine ligaments. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 10:216–226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2013.04.005CrossRefPubMed

22.

Newell N, Carpanen D, Grigoriadis G et al (2019) Material properties of human lumbar intervertebral discs across strain rates. Spine J 19(12):2013–2024. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2019.07.012CrossRefPubMed

23.

Rieger LK, Shah AS, Schick S et al (2024) Subject-specific geometry of FE lumbar spine models for the replication of fracture locations using dynamic drop tests. Ann Biomed Eng. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10439-023-03402-yCrossRefPubMed

24.

Peldschus S, Wagner A, Muehlbauer J et al (2021) Standardised validation procedure for qualifying the HBM to be used for assessing effectiveness of pilot protection principles

25.

Armijo-Olivo S, Jara X, Castillo N et al (2006) A comparison of the head and cervical posture between the self-balanced position and the Frankfurt method. J Oral Rehabil 33(3):194–201. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.2005.01554.xCrossRefPubMed

26.

Harrison DE, Harrison DD, Cailliet R et al (2000) Cobb Method or Harrison posterior tangent method. Spine 25(16):2072–2078CrossRefPubMed

27.

Berthonnaud E, Dimnet J, Roussouly P et al (2005) Analysis of the sagittal balance of the spine and pelvis using shape and orientation parameters. J Spinal Disord Tech 18(1):40–47. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.bsd.0000117542.88865.77CrossRefPubMed

28.

Mac-Thiong J-M, Labelle H, Berthonnaud E et al (2007) Sagittal spinopelvic balance in normal children and adolescents. Eur Spine J 16(2):227–234. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-005-0013-8CrossRefPubMed

29.

Park S-M, Song K-S, Park S-H et al (2015) Does whole-spine lateral radiograph with clavicle positioning reflect the correct cervical sagittal alignment? Eur Spine J 24(1):57–62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-014-3525-2CrossRefPubMed

30.

Rocabado M (1983) Biomechanical relationship of the cranial, cervical, and hyoid regions. J Craniomandib Pract 1(3):61–66. https://doi.org/10.1080/07345410.1983.11677834CrossRef

31.

Han J, Kamber M, Pei J (2012) // 2011) Getting to Know Your Data. In: Han J, Kamber M, Pei J (eds) Data Mining. Concepts and techniques, 3. ed. Elsevier; Elsevier Science, Burlington, pp 39–82

32.

Anderson AE, Ellis BJ, Weiss JA (2007) Verification, validation and sensitivity studies in computational biomechanics. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin 10(3):171–184. https://doi.org/10.1080/10255840601160484CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

33.

Fuchs T (2018) Objektivierung der Modellbildung von verletzungsmechanischen Experimenten für die Validierung von Finite-Elemente Menschmodellen. Dissertation, Ludwig-Maximilians University Munich

34.

Iwamoto M, Kisanuki Y, Watanabe I et al (2002) Development of a finite element model of the Total Human Model for Safety (THUMS) and application to injury reconstruction. In: Proceedings of International Technical Conference on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles (ESV)

35.

Chosa E, Goto K, Totoribe K et al (2004) Analysis of the effect of lumbar spine fusion on the superior adjacent intervertebral disk in the presence of disk degeneration, using the three-dimensional finite element method. J Spin Disord Tech 17(2):134–139. https://doi.org/10.1097/00024720-200404000-00010CrossRef

36.

Natarajan RN, Williams JR, Andersson GBJ (2004) Recent advances in analytical modeling of lumbar disc degeneration. Spine 29(23):2733–2741. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.brs.0000146471.59052.e6CrossRefPubMed

37.

Natarajan RN, Williams JR, Andersson GBJ (2006) Modeling changes in intervertebral disc mechanics with degeneration. J Bone Joint Surg Am 88 Suppl 236–40. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.F.00002

38.

Ruberté LM, Natarajan RN, Andersson GBJ (2009) Influence of single-level lumbar degenerative disc disease on the behavior of the adjacent segments–a finite element model study. J Biomech 42(3):341–348. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2008.11.024CrossRefPubMed

39.

Stemper BD, Storvik SG, Yoganandan N et al (2011) A new PMHS model for lumbar spine injuries during vertical acceleration. J Biomech Eng 133(8). https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4004655

40.

González-García M, Weber J, Peldschus S (2021) Potential effect of pre-activated muscles under a far-side lateral impact. Traffic Inj Prev 22(Suppl 1):148–152. https://doi.org/10.1080/15389588.2021.1982597CrossRef

41.

Albert DL (2020) Variations in user implementation of the CORA Rating Metric. Stapp Car Crash J 64:1–30. https://doi.org/10.4271/2020-22-0001CrossRefPubMed

42.

Rieger LK, Draper D, Shah AS et al (2022) Subject-specific Lumbar Spine Finite Element Model Creation and Validation using Dynamic Compression. In: Proceedings of the IRCOBI Conference, pp 886–887

43.

Draper D, Shah AS, Peldschus S et al (2020) Initial validation of a human body model lumbar spine using dynamic compression. In: Proceedings of the IRCOBI Conference, pp 213–214

44.

Tushak SK, Paul Donlon J, Gepner BD et al (2022) Failure tolerance of the human lumbar spine in dynamic combined compression and flexion loading. J Biomech 135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2022.111051

45.

Whitcome KK, Shapiro LJ, Lieberman DE (2007) Fetal load and the evolution of lumbar lordosis in bipedal hominins. Nature 450(7172):1075–1078. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature06342CrossRefPubMed

46.

Naserkhaki S, Jaremko JL, El-Rich M (2016) Effects of inter-individual lumbar spine geometry variation on load-sharing: geometrically personalized finite element study. J Biomech 49(13):2909–2917. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2016.06.032CrossRefPubMed

47.

Natarajan RN, Andersson GBJ (1999) The influence of lumbar disc height and cross-sectional area on the mechanical response of the disc to physiologic loading. Spine 24(18):1873–1881CrossRefPubMed

Title: Simulative investigation of the required level of geometrical individualization of the lumbar spines to predict fractures
Authors: Laura Kathrin Rieger
Mirko Junge
Rachel Cutlan
Steffen Peldschus
Brian D. Stemper
Publication date: 02-05-2024
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: International Journal of Legal Medicine
Print ISSN: 0937-9827
Electronic ISSN: 1437-1596
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414-024-03225-z

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Simulative investigation of the required level of geometrical individualization of the lumbar spines to predict fractures

Abstract

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Please log in to get access to this content