Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40838566›Full record

ArticleVeterinary surgery : VS2025

Biomechanical implications of lumbar intervertebral disc fenestration in rabbits: Comparison of ex vivo and in vivo conditions as an experimental model for chrondrodystrophic dogs with type 1 intervertebral disc disease.

James D Crowley, Rema A Oliver, Tian Wang, Matthew H Pelletier, William R Walsh

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Veterinary surgery : VS, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

James D CrowleySurgical and Orthopedic Research Laboratories (SORL), Prince of Wales Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales (UNSW) Sydney, Prince of Wales Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7884-4199
Rema A OliverSurgical and Orthopedic Research Laboratories (SORL), Prince of Wales Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales (UNSW) Sydney, Prince of Wales Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Tian WangSurgical and Orthopedic Research Laboratories (SORL), Prince of Wales Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales (UNSW) Sydney, Prince of Wales Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Matthew H PelletierSurgical and Orthopedic Research Laboratories (SORL), Prince of Wales Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales (UNSW) Sydney, Prince of Wales Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
William R WalshSurgical and Orthopedic Research Laboratories (SORL), Prince of Wales Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales (UNSW) Sydney, Prince of Wales Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo compare the effect of intervertebral disc (IVD) fenestration on L3/4 range of motion (ROM) under ex vivo and in vivo conditions in a rabbit model. STUDY

designRandomized experimental study. ANIMALS: New Zealand White rabbits (ex vivo: n = 18; in vivo: n = 12).

methodsL3/4 motion segments were tested in lateral bending (LB), flexion-extension (FE), and axial rotation (AR) across five groups (n = 6 per group): control (C), ex vivo fenestration (EVF), in vivo fenestration with a 6 (IVF6) and 12 week (IVF12) timepoint, and intact/annulotomy/fenestration on the same specimen (IAF). Data are reported as ROM and neutral zone (NZ) and were compared between groups using ANOVA and t-tests.

resultsIn IAF, fenestration increased ROM in LB, FE, and AR (p = .030) and NZ in FE (p = .010) compared to intact. EVF had greater ROM and NZ than C in all planes (LB, FE: p = .0010; AR: p = .030). IVF6 and IVF12 showed reduced ROM and NZ in LB and FE compared to C (p = .020-.0010) and EVF (p = .0010), with no difference in AR (p = .35). IVF6 and IVF12 did not differ significantly in any plane. Right lateral bending was significantly greater than left in EVF (p = .020), but not in IVF6 (p = .15) or IVF12 (p = .31).

conclusionFenestration increased spinal motion ex vivo, while in vivo specimens showed reduced ROM over time, consistent with a stabilizing biological response. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: These findings provide a foundation for investigating the biological and biomechanical effects of IVD fenestration in dogs.

Indexed as

Intervertebral DiscIntervertebral Disc DegenerationIntervertebral Disc DisplacementLumbar VertebraeAnimalsBiomechanical PhenomenaDisease Models, AnimalDogsFemaleMaleRabbitsRange of Motion, Articular

Identifiers

PMID40838566
PMCPMC12618167

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.