Cargando…

Disc geometry measurement methods affect reported compressive mechanics by up to 65%

Mechanical testing is a valuable tool for assessing intervertebral disc health, but the wide range of testing protocols makes it difficult to compare results from different studies. Normalizing mechanical properties by disc geometry allows for such comparisons, but there is little consistency in the...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lim, Shiyin, Huff, Reece D., Veres, Joanna E., Satish, Divya, O'Connell, Grace D.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9520764/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36203862
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jsp2.1214
_version_ 1784799698368856064
author Lim, Shiyin
Huff, Reece D.
Veres, Joanna E.
Satish, Divya
O'Connell, Grace D.
author_facet Lim, Shiyin
Huff, Reece D.
Veres, Joanna E.
Satish, Divya
O'Connell, Grace D.
author_sort Lim, Shiyin
collection PubMed
description Mechanical testing is a valuable tool for assessing intervertebral disc health, but the wide range of testing protocols makes it difficult to compare results from different studies. Normalizing mechanical properties by disc geometry allows for such comparisons, but there is little consistency in the methods by which disc geometry is measured. As such, we hypothesized that methods used to measure disc geometry would impact reported mechanical properties. Disc height and area were measured using computed tomography (CT), digital calipers, and ImageJ to yield three different measurements for disc height and six for disc area. Disc heights measured by digital calipers ex situ were >30% less than disc heights measured in situ by CT, and disc areas measured ex situ using ImageJ were >30% larger than those measured by CT. This significantly affected reported mechanical properties, leading to a 65% reduction in normalized compressive stiffness in the most extreme case. Though we cannot quantitatively correct between methods, results presented in this study suggest that disc geometry measurement methods have a significant impact on normalized mechanical properties and should be accounted for when comparing results.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9520764
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-95207642022-10-05 Disc geometry measurement methods affect reported compressive mechanics by up to 65% Lim, Shiyin Huff, Reece D. Veres, Joanna E. Satish, Divya O'Connell, Grace D. JOR Spine Short Communication Mechanical testing is a valuable tool for assessing intervertebral disc health, but the wide range of testing protocols makes it difficult to compare results from different studies. Normalizing mechanical properties by disc geometry allows for such comparisons, but there is little consistency in the methods by which disc geometry is measured. As such, we hypothesized that methods used to measure disc geometry would impact reported mechanical properties. Disc height and area were measured using computed tomography (CT), digital calipers, and ImageJ to yield three different measurements for disc height and six for disc area. Disc heights measured by digital calipers ex situ were >30% less than disc heights measured in situ by CT, and disc areas measured ex situ using ImageJ were >30% larger than those measured by CT. This significantly affected reported mechanical properties, leading to a 65% reduction in normalized compressive stiffness in the most extreme case. Though we cannot quantitatively correct between methods, results presented in this study suggest that disc geometry measurement methods have a significant impact on normalized mechanical properties and should be accounted for when comparing results. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2022-07-19 /pmc/articles/PMC9520764/ /pubmed/36203862 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jsp2.1214 Text en © 2022 The Authors. JOR Spine published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Orthopaedic Research 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 Short Communication
Lim, Shiyin
Huff, Reece D.
Veres, Joanna E.
Satish, Divya
O'Connell, Grace D.
Disc geometry measurement methods affect reported compressive mechanics by up to 65%
title Disc geometry measurement methods affect reported compressive mechanics by up to 65%
title_full Disc geometry measurement methods affect reported compressive mechanics by up to 65%
title_fullStr Disc geometry measurement methods affect reported compressive mechanics by up to 65%
title_full_unstemmed Disc geometry measurement methods affect reported compressive mechanics by up to 65%
title_short Disc geometry measurement methods affect reported compressive mechanics by up to 65%
title_sort disc geometry measurement methods affect reported compressive mechanics by up to 65%
topic Short Communication
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9520764/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36203862
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jsp2.1214
work_keys_str_mv AT limshiyin discgeometrymeasurementmethodsaffectreportedcompressivemechanicsbyupto65
AT huffreeced discgeometrymeasurementmethodsaffectreportedcompressivemechanicsbyupto65
AT veresjoannae discgeometrymeasurementmethodsaffectreportedcompressivemechanicsbyupto65
AT satishdivya discgeometrymeasurementmethodsaffectreportedcompressivemechanicsbyupto65
AT oconnellgraced discgeometrymeasurementmethodsaffectreportedcompressivemechanicsbyupto65