Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40560373›Full record

SynthesisEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2025

Lumbar disc herniation modelling: a review of ex-vivo mechanical models and a comparison with clinical data.

Thomas David Slater, Hans-Joachim Wilke, Gnanaprakash Gurusamy, Shanmuganathan Rajasekaran, Nicolas Newell

Abstract readSystematic ReviewComparative Study
In one paragraph

Synthesis in 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, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Minor endplate damage as an initiator of systemic biomechanical disruption of the lumbar disc: a finite element analysis of the 'mechanical tipping point' in disc failure.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 · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Patient-reported outcome measures in lumbar disc herniation: a scoping review.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 · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Can cervical disc herniations be provokedFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Thomas David SlaterDepartment of Bioengineering, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Hans-Joachim WilkeInstitute of Orthopaedic Research and Biomechanics, University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany.
Gnanaprakash GurusamyDepartment of Orthopaedics and Spine Surgery, Ganga Hospital, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, India.
Shanmuganathan RajasekaranDepartment of Orthopaedics and Spine Surgery, Ganga Hospital, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, India.
Nicolas NewellDepartment of Bioengineering, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom. n.newell09@imperial.ac.uk.

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft 1352/14-4Innovate UK 10051703
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeEx-vivo herniation models are essential for studying lumbar disc herniation mechanisms, but their morphological accuracy remains unclear due to limited validation against patient-derived clinical data. This review collates clinical lumbar disc herniation characteristics and evaluates whether existing models replicate real-world pathology. By identifying the most morphologically relevant models, this study provides a stronger foundation for improving mechanistic herniation models.

methodsA systematic review following PRISMA guidelines identified clinical studies detailing herniation characteristics and experimental models of ex-vivo lumbar disc failure. Models were categorised by loading conditions (complex ultimate compression; cyclic; and intradiscal pressurisation), then compared to clinical data to assess their validity.

resultsIn patients, extrusions (50%) and protrusions (34%) are the most common lumbar disc herniation types, with paracentral herniations (61%) predominantly occurring at L4-L5 (49%) and L5-S1 (42%). Structural failure patterns varied, with annulus fibrosus failure reported in 35-81% of cases and endplate junction failure in 19-68%. Among 25 analysed models, all loading types induced herniations, but often with different damage patterns. Complex ultimate compression caused abrupt failures and fractures, while cyclic led to progressive annular damage. Intradiscal pressurisation highlighted nucleus pulposus migration pathways. Within a single herniation model, the damage mechanisms seen were similar between discs.

conclusionsClinical herniation patterns show significant variability, while ex-vivo models yield more repeatable outcomes. Cyclic, complex ultimate compression, and intradiscal pressurisation models provide valuable mechanistic insights but differ in physiological relevance. Researchers must consider the physiological relevance of the applied load and the differences between animal and human discs when selecting a model. Future research should focus on understanding herniation progression and identifying initiating factors to improve prevention strategies.

Indexed as

Intervertebral Disc DisplacementLumbar VertebraeModels, BiologicalAnimalsBiomechanical PhenomenaHumansEx-vivoHerniationIntervertebral discLumbarSpine

Identifiers

PMID40560373
PMCPMC12496270

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.