ArticleAnnals of biomedical engineering2025
In Vivo Pressure Responses of the Cervical Cerebrospinal Fluid in a Porcine Model of Extension and Flexion Whiplash Exposures.
Article in Annals of biomedical engineering, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe mechanisms of whiplash injury remain poorly understood. One theory suggests that the characteristic inertial loading of the head and neck in motor vehicle collisions can produce injurious cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) pressure transients in the cervical spine. However, these in vivo CSF pressure responses have not yet been adequately characterized.
methodsThis study used a pig model to characterize the cervical CSF pressure responses to head kinematic inputs in extension (simulating low-speed rear-end collisions with no head restraint) and flexion (simulating low-speed frontal collisions). We also compared the pressure and pressure impulses at three spinal levels to determine if the pressure transient responses differ spatially. Four anesthetized pigs were instrumented with intrathecal pressure transducers placed at the C2, C5, and C7 levels. A servomotor system was programmed to actuate the head through specific trajectories to model two extension, and two flexion, whiplash exposures.
resultsDuring the extension tests, mean peak pressure transients ranged from - 31.2 to 148.7 mmHg, whereas during the flexion tests, mean peak pressure transients ranged from - 50.8 to 126.9 mmHg. Peak individual responses ranged from - 71.1 to 244.8 mmHg across all tests. Pressure impulses reached a maximum of 6.77 mmHg·s. Peak pressure and pressure impulses were largest at the C5 and C7 levels during extension exposures and at the C2 level in flexion exposures.
conclusionThe reported pressure and pressure impulse responses could be used to determine neural tissue tolerances relevant to whiplash injury and contribute to the development and validation of computational models of whiplash.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40016416What 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.