ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2025
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.
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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Excessive intervertebral disc (IVD) strains and vertebral body motions are associated with lower back pain (LBP). Quantifying these strains and motions may aid in predicting the success of candidate LBP treatments and enable better prediction of pre-operative instability and post-operative implant failure, but cannot currently be obtained in routine clinical assessment. Thus, the aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of utilising clinical measures of spinal alignment, IVD geometry, and disc degeneration to predict Methods: Fifteen participants presenting no LBP were subjected to one unloaded and one supine extension-loaded MRI scan. MRI-based digital volume correlation (DVC) was used to quantify the principal and shear strains of lumbar IVDs and anterior-posterior, cranial-caudal, and total translation of the vertebral bodies (L1-S1). IVD height, anterior-posterior IVD height ratio, segmental lordosis, lumbar lordosis, lumbar height, sacral angle, and Pfirrmann grade were evaluated using the reference MR images. Multivariate linear regression was used to predict level-wise strains and translations. Results: IVD strains and vertebral translations were successfully predicted from clinical measures of spinal alignment and disc degeneration, but only at the L4-L5 and L5-S1 levels. Specifically, greater minimum principal IVD strains and vertebral anterolisthesis were associated with a reduced anterior-posterior IVD height ratio at L4-L5 (p < 0.01). Greater peak minimum principal strains and anterolisthesis were associated with taller IVDs in the L5-S1 segment (p < 0.05). In the same segment, increased sacral angle was associated with greater peak minimum principal strains (p < 0.05) but lower anterolisthesis (p < 0.01). Discussion: This study demonstrates the potential of utilising radiographic variables to predict the biomechanical behaviour at the segmental level, giving rise to future exploration of complex loading patterns in patient cohorts with specific spinal pathologies.
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.