Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41573316›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2025

Effect of rear impact on the instrumented cervical spine: a finite element study.

Balaji Harinathan, Davidson Jebaseelan, Narayan Yoganandan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Balaji HarinathanDepartment of Neurosurgery, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, United States.
Davidson JebaseelanSchool of Mechanical Engineering, Vellore Institute of Technology, Chennai, India.
Narayan YoganandanDepartment of Neurosurgery, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) is a leading cause of spinal cord dysfunction and often requires surgical decompression and instrumentation. Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is the most commonly performed procedure, but the biomechanical response of instrumented cervical spines under rear-impact loading remains unclear. Methods: A validated finite element model of the head-neck complex with active musculature, spinal cord, and three instrumented constructs was used to simulate a low-speed rear impact corresponding to a 2.6 m/s change in velocity. The following surgical conditions were modeled at C4-C7: ACDF, posterior cervical laminectomy and fusion (PCLF), and laminoplasty (LP). Spinal cord stress and strain, ligament strain (including anterior longitudinal and capsular ligaments), and implant stress were evaluated at the index, superior, and inferior segments. Results: Compared to ACDF, both PCLF and LP reduced spinal cord stress and strain at the index level, with PCLF showing the greatest reduction. LP preserved motion but increased facet capsular ligament strain at the index and adjacent levels. Anterior longitudinal ligament strains remained below 36%, within the reported 40-45% failure range, while PCLF screws exceeded the 900 MPa yield strength of Ti-6Al-4V at all levels except C4, indicating a reduced hardware safety margin. ACDF and LP implants remained within safe stress limits. Conclusion: Under rear-impact loading, PCLF reduced spinal cord stress and strain relative to ACDF but increased hardware stresses, whereas LP preserved motion at the cost of higher facet capsular ligament strain. These findings suggest that PCLF may be preferred when minimizing spinal cord loading is a priority, while LP may be selected when motion preservation is critical, with awareness of construct-specific trade-offs in ligament and implant loading.

Indexed as

cervical spinefinite element modelrear impactspinal cord compressionspinal cord injuryspinal cord strain

Identifiers

PMID41573316
PMCPMC12819763

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.