Abstract
Cervical spine injuries (CSIs) arising from collisions are uncommon in contact sports, such as rugby union, but their consequences can be devastating. Several FE modelling approaches are available in the literature, but a fully calibrated and validated FE modelling framework for cervical spines under compressive dynamic-impact loading is still lacking and material properties are not adequately calibrated for such events. This study aimed to develop and validate a methodology for specimen-specific FE modelling of vertebral bodies under impact loading. Thirty-five (n = 35) individual vertebral bodies (VBs) were dissected from porcine spine segments, potted in bone cement and CT scanned. A speckle pattern was applied to the anterior faces of the bones to allow digital image correlation (DIC), which monitored the surface displacements. Twenty-seven (n = 27) VBs were quasi-statically compressively tested to a load up to 10 from the cranial side. Specimen-specific FE models were developed for fourteen (n = 14) of the samples in this group. The material properties were optimised based on the experimental load-displacement data using a specimen-specific factor () to calibrate a density to Young’s modulus relationship. The average calibration factor arising from this group was calculated () and applied to a control group of thirteen (n = 13) samples. The resulting VB stiffnesses was compared to experimental findings. The final eight (n = 8) VBs were subjected to an impact load applied via a falling mass of at a velocity of −1. Surface displacements and strains were acquired from the anterior VB surface via DIC, and the impact load was monitored with two load cells. Specimen-specific FE models were created for this dynamic group and material properties were assigned again based on the density–Young’s modulus relationship previously validated for static experiments, supplemented with an additional factor (). The optimised conversion factor for quasi-static loading, , had an average of 0.033. Using this factor, the validation models presented an average numerical stiffness value % greater than the experimental one. From the dynamic loading experiments, the value for was found to be 0.14, 4.2 times greater than . The average numerical stiffness was % greater than in the experiments. Almost all models presented similar stiffness variations and regions of maximum displacement to those observed via DIC. The developed FE modelling methodology allowed the creation of models which predicted both static and dynamic behaviour of VBs. Deformation patterns on the VB surfaces were acquired from the FE models and compared to DIC data, achieving high agreement. This methodology is now validated to be fully applied to create whole cervical spine models to simulate axial impact scenarios replicating rugby collision events.
Highlights
Cervical spine injuries (CSIs) are one of the most threatening injuries to the spine [1,2,3,4]
Surface displacements and strains were acquired from the anterior vertebral bodies (VBs) surface via digital image correlation (DIC), and the impact load was monitored with two load cells
Experimental and numerical VB stiffness value distributions were compared using the non-parametric Mann–Whitney U-test and no statistical significant difference between the groups was found (p > 0.05); both were characterised by a median value of about 8600 N mm−1
Summary
Cervical spine injuries (CSIs) are one of the most threatening injuries to the spine [1,2,3,4]. CSIs can lead to paraplegia, tetraplegia or even death Understanding how such injuries occur is crucial in the development of new treatments and injury-specific prevention plans and to increase the long-term well-being of CSI patients [5]. This research field, is characterised by significant challenges, including the fact that the instantaneous nature of the injury makes its assessment difficult with traditional techniques. This is certainly one of the challenges faced when studying CSIs arising from rugby, wherein views can be obstructed by other players. Experimental and in vivo studies have been used as study surrogates; there still is no consensus as to the mechanisms leading to injury [9,12]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
