ArticleInternational journal of spine surgery2020
Development and Validation of a Computationally Efficient Finite Element Model of the Human Lumbar Spine: Application to Disc Degeneration.
Article in International journal of spine surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of vertebrae shape variation on lumbar spine loading: an image-based computational modeling study.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026Article
- Biomechanical analysis of lumbar oblique manipulation for lumbar disc herniation with different protrusion subtypes.Mechanobiology in medicine · 2026Article
- Evaluation of the porosity and structural stability of 3D-printed porous titanium pedicle screws using finite element analysis.Biomedical engineering letters · 2026Article
- Advances in biomechanical modeling of lumbar spine diseases and tumors: gaps, opportunities, and AI integration.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Review
- Towards biomimetic evolution of artificial intervertebral disc: a review.Medical & biological engineering & computing · 2025Review
- Development and Assessment of a Novel Generic Finite Element Spine Model for Clinical Applications.International journal for numerical methods in biomedical engineering · 2025Article
- Subsidence reduction effect of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) with upper and lower open windows modified with lattice structure.Biomedical engineering letters · 2025Article
- Comparative FEM study on intervertebral disc modeling: Holzapfel-Gasser-Ogden vs. structural rebars.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024Article
- The Effect of Concave-Side Intertransverse Ligament Laxity on the Stress of AIS Lumbar Spine Based on Finite Element Method.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Biomaterials for Interbody Fusion in Bone Tissue Engineering.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022Review
- Automated Pipeline to Generate Anatomically Accurate Patient-Specific Biomechanical Models of Healthy and Pathological FSUs.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2021Article
- Finite element study of the impact of pedicle screw density on the biomechanical response of a Lenke 1AN scoliotic curve.Journal of orthopaedicsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis study develops and validates an accurate, computationally efficient, 3-dimensional finite element model (FEM) of the human lumbar spine. Advantages of this simplified model are shown by its application to a disc degeneration study that we demonstrate is completed in one-sixth the time required when using more complicated computed tomography (CT) scan-based models.
methodsAn osseoligamentous FEM of the L1-L5 spine is developed using simple shapes based on average anatomical dimensions of key features of the spine rather than CT scan images. Pure moments of 7.5 Nm and a compressive follower load of 1000 N are individually applied to the L1 vertebra. Validation is achieved by comparing rotations and intradiscal pressures to other widely accepted FEMs and in vitro studies. Then degenerative disc properties are modeled and rotations calculated. Required computation times are compared between the model presented in this paper and other models developed using CT scans.
resultsFor the validation study, parameter values for a healthy spine were used with the loading conditions described above. Total L1-L5 rotations for flexion, extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation under pure moment loading were calculated as 20.3°, 10.7°, 19.7°, and 10.3°, respectively, and under a compressive follower load, maximum intradiscal pressures were calculated as 0.68 MPa. These values compare favorably with the data used for validation. When studying the effects of disc degeneration, the affected segment is shown to experience decreases in rotations during flexion, extension, and lateral bending (24%-56%), while rotations are shown to increase during axial rotation (14%-40%). Adjacent levels realize relatively minor changes in rotation (1%-6%). This parametric study required 17.5 hours of computation time compared to more than 4 days required if utilizing typical published CT scan-based models, illustrating one of the primary advantages of the model presented in this article.
conclusionsThe FEM presented in this article produces a biomechanical response comparable to widely accepted, complex, CT scan-based models and in vitro studies while requiring much shorter computation times. This makes the model ideal for conducting parametric studies of spinal pathologies and spinal correction techniques.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.