Cargando…

Biomechanical in vitro evaluation of the kangaroo spine in comparison with human spinal data

On the basis of the kangaroo's pseudo‐biped locomotion and its upright position, it could be assumed that the kangaroo might be an interesting model for spine research and that it may serve as a reasonable surrogate model for biomechanical in vitro tests. The purpose of this in vitro study was...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wilke, Hans‐Joachim, Betz, Volker Michael, Kienle, Annette
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10273331/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36929138
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/joa.13852
_version_ 1785059663376547840
author Wilke, Hans‐Joachim
Betz, Volker Michael
Kienle, Annette
author_facet Wilke, Hans‐Joachim
Betz, Volker Michael
Kienle, Annette
author_sort Wilke, Hans‐Joachim
collection PubMed
description On the basis of the kangaroo's pseudo‐biped locomotion and its upright position, it could be assumed that the kangaroo might be an interesting model for spine research and that it may serve as a reasonable surrogate model for biomechanical in vitro tests. The purpose of this in vitro study was to provide biomechanical properties of the kangaroo spine and compare them with human spinal data from the literature. In addition, references to already published kangaroo anatomical spinal parameters will be discussed. Thirteen kangaroo spines from C4 to S4 were sectioned into single‐motion segments. The specimens were tested by a spine tester under pure moments. The range of motion and neutral zone of each segment were determined in flexion and extension, right and left lateral bending and left and right axial rotation. Overall, we found greater flexibility in the kangaroo spine compared to the human spine. Similarities were only found in the cervical, lower thoracic and lumbar spinal regions. The range of motion of the kangaroo and human spines displayed comparable trends in the cervical (C4–C7), lower thoracic and lumbar regions independent of the motion plane. In the upper and middle thoracic regions, the flexibility of the kangaroo spine was considerably larger. These results suggested that the kangaroo specimens could be considered to be a surrogate, but only in particular cases, for biomechanical in vitro tests.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10273331
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-102733312023-06-17 Biomechanical in vitro evaluation of the kangaroo spine in comparison with human spinal data Wilke, Hans‐Joachim Betz, Volker Michael Kienle, Annette J Anat Review Article On the basis of the kangaroo's pseudo‐biped locomotion and its upright position, it could be assumed that the kangaroo might be an interesting model for spine research and that it may serve as a reasonable surrogate model for biomechanical in vitro tests. The purpose of this in vitro study was to provide biomechanical properties of the kangaroo spine and compare them with human spinal data from the literature. In addition, references to already published kangaroo anatomical spinal parameters will be discussed. Thirteen kangaroo spines from C4 to S4 were sectioned into single‐motion segments. The specimens were tested by a spine tester under pure moments. The range of motion and neutral zone of each segment were determined in flexion and extension, right and left lateral bending and left and right axial rotation. Overall, we found greater flexibility in the kangaroo spine compared to the human spine. Similarities were only found in the cervical, lower thoracic and lumbar spinal regions. The range of motion of the kangaroo and human spines displayed comparable trends in the cervical (C4–C7), lower thoracic and lumbar regions independent of the motion plane. In the upper and middle thoracic regions, the flexibility of the kangaroo spine was considerably larger. These results suggested that the kangaroo specimens could be considered to be a surrogate, but only in particular cases, for biomechanical in vitro tests. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2023-03-17 /pmc/articles/PMC10273331/ /pubmed/36929138 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/joa.13852 Text en © 2023 The Authors. Journal of Anatomy published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Anatomical Society. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Review Article
Wilke, Hans‐Joachim
Betz, Volker Michael
Kienle, Annette
Biomechanical in vitro evaluation of the kangaroo spine in comparison with human spinal data
title Biomechanical in vitro evaluation of the kangaroo spine in comparison with human spinal data
title_full Biomechanical in vitro evaluation of the kangaroo spine in comparison with human spinal data
title_fullStr Biomechanical in vitro evaluation of the kangaroo spine in comparison with human spinal data
title_full_unstemmed Biomechanical in vitro evaluation of the kangaroo spine in comparison with human spinal data
title_short Biomechanical in vitro evaluation of the kangaroo spine in comparison with human spinal data
title_sort biomechanical in vitro evaluation of the kangaroo spine in comparison with human spinal data
topic Review Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10273331/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36929138
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/joa.13852
work_keys_str_mv AT wilkehansjoachim biomechanicalinvitroevaluationofthekangaroospineincomparisonwithhumanspinaldata
AT betzvolkermichael biomechanicalinvitroevaluationofthekangaroospineincomparisonwithhumanspinaldata
AT kienleannette biomechanicalinvitroevaluationofthekangaroospineincomparisonwithhumanspinaldata