ARUP; ISBN: 978-0-9562121-5-3 - CMBBE 2012 - Cardiff University

There are obvious limitations to our study e.g. the fact that we did not vary the distance
between the center of the facet joints and the center of the discs when we investigated the
influence of geometry on the disc response. Additionally, we assume that the annulus matrix
and the fiber stiffness is the same for all annulus elements but it is a well known fact that the
outer most layers of the annulus are considerably stiffer and stronger than the annulus layers
closer to the center of the disc. Over all, however, we believe that this parameterized FE
modeling technique can be a useful aid in e.g. implant design and for understanding
degenerative processes of IVDs.
6. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This project is funded by the AO Foundation, Switzerland (project ANNUMECH).
7. REFERENCES
1. Moore, K.R., M.R. Pinto, and L.M. Butler, Degenerative disc disease treated with
combined anterior and posterior arthrodesis and posterior instrumentation. Spine,
2002. 27(15): p. 1680-1686.
2. Meijer, G.J., et al., The effect of three-dimensional geometrical changes during
adolescent growth on the biomechanics of a spinal motion segment. J Biomech, 2010.
43(8): p. 1590-7.
3. Zander, T., et al., Estimation of muscle forces in the lumbar spine during upper-body
inclination. Clinical Biomechanics, 2001. 16: p. S73-S80.
4. Panjabi, M.M. and A.A. White, Basic Biomechanics of the Spine. Neurosurgery, 1980.
7(1): p. 76-93.
5. Panjabi, M.M., et al., Human Lumbar Vertebrae - Quantitative 3-Dimensional
Anatomy. Spine, 1992. 17(3): p. 299-306.
6. Abuzayed, B., et al., Anatomic basis of anterior and posterior instrumentation of the
spine: morphometric study. Surg Radiol Anat, 2010. 32(1): p. 75-85.
7. Rohlmann, A., et al., Analysis of the influence of disc degeneration on the mechanical
behaviour of a lumbar motion segment using the finite element method. J Biomech,
2006. 39(13): p. 2484-90.
8. Markert, B., W. Ehlers, and N. Karajan, A general polyconvex strain-energy function
for fiber-reinforced materials. Pamm, 2005. 5(1): p. 245-246.
9. Studer, H., et al., Biomechanical model of human cornea based on stromal
microstructure. J Biomech, 2010. 43(5): p. 836-42.
10. Polikeit, A., et al., Factors influencing stresses in the lumbar spine after the insertion
of intervertebral cages: finite element analysis. Eur Spine J, 2003. 12(4): p. 413-20.
11. Chazal, J., et al., Biomechanical Properties of Spinal Ligaments and a Histological
Study of the Supraspinal Ligament in Traction. J Biomech, 1985. 18(3): p. 167-176.
12. van der Plaats, A., A.G. Veldhuizen, and G.J. Verkerke, Numerical simulation of
asymmetrically altered growth as initiation mechanism of scoliosis. Ann Biomed Eng,
2007. 35(7): p. 1206-15.
13. Eberlein, R., G.A. Holzapfel, and C.A.J. Schulze-Bauer, An Anisotropic Model for
Annulus Tissue and enhanced finite element analyses of intact lumbar disc bodies.
Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin, 2001. 4: p. 209-229.
14. Bowden, A.E., et al., Quality of motion considerations in numerical analysis of motion
restoring implants of the spine. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon), 2008. 23(5): p. 536-44.