Elsevier

Journal of Biomechanics

Volume 52, 8 February 2017, Pages 113-121
Journal of Biomechanics

Instantaneous centers of rotation for lumbar segmental extension in vivo

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2016.12.021Get rights and content

Abstract

The study aimed to map instantaneous centers of rotation (ICRs) of lumbar motion segments during a functional lifting task and examine differences across segments and variations caused by magnitude of weight lifted. Eleven healthy participants lifted loads of three different magnitudes (4.5, 9, and 13.5 kg) from a trunk-flexed (~75°) to an upright position, while being imaged by a dynamic stereo X-ray (DSX) system. Tracked lumbar vertebral (L2-S1) motion data were processed into highly accurate 6DOF intervertebral (L2L3, L3L4, L4L5, L5S1) kinematics. ICRs were computed using the finite helical axis method. Effects of segment level and load magnitude on the anterior-posterior (AP) and superior-inferior (SI) ICR migration ranges were assessed with a mixed-effects model. Further, ICRs were averaged to a single center of rotation (COR) to assess segment-specific differences in COR AP- and SI-coordinates. The AP range was found to be significantly larger for L2L3 compared to L3L4 (p=0.02), L4L5 and L5S1 (p<0.001). Average ICR SI location was relatively higher – near the superior endplate of the inferior vertebra – for L4L5 and L5SI compared to L2L3 and L3L4 (p≤0.001) – located between the mid-transverse plane and superior endplate of the inferior vertebra – but differences were not significant amongst themselves (p>0.9). Load magnitude had a significant effect only on the SI component of ICR migration range (13.5 kg>9 kg and 4.5 kg; p=0.049 and 0.017 respectively). The reported segment-specific ICR data exemplify improved input parameters for lumbar spine biomechanical models and design of disc replacements, and base-line references for potential diagnostic applications.

Introduction

Lumbar spinal motion has predominantly been characterized in terms of relatively simple metrics, such as end-range of rotational motion (ROM) occurring about a fixed, average center of rotation (COR) (Cossette et al., 1971, Freudiger et al., 1999, Fujii et al., 2007, Ochia et al., 2006, Pearcy et al., 1984, White and Panjabi, 1978, Xia et al., 2010). However, lumbar motion comprises rotational and translational components (Aiyangar et al., 2014, Gertzbein et al., 1984, Ogston et al., 1986, Xia et al., 2010), and motion at different intervals may exhibit different characteristics, particularly between healthy and pathologically or surgically altered spines (Ahmadi et al., 2009, Ellingson and Nuckley, 2015, Natarajan et al., 2008, Passias et al., 2011). Hence, comprehensive characterization of vertebral kinematics should ideally incorporate the spatial and temporal variations of both rotational and translational components. Within this context, mapping the locus of instantaneous centers of rotation (ICRs) between two adjacent vertebrae over a given motion – the centrode – has been shown to be a reasonable way to simultaneously quantify the translational component of lumbar motion and its coupling with the rotational component. More importantly, the ICR has been shown to have a biological basis linking aberrations in its location to anatomical and pathological factors, based on its strong association with the center of reaction (Bogduk et al., 1995, Schneider et al., 2005, Zander et al., 2016). In vitro as well as some in vivo studies have shown promising results in applying spatial variations in ICR paths to distinguish between healthy lumbar spines and those with segmental instability (Ahmadi et al., 2009, Gertzbein et al., 1986) as well as different degrees of disc degeneration (Ellingson and Nuckley, 2015, Gertzbein et al., 1985). Modelling studies have demonstrated how even small variations in implant placement and design could elicit notable alterations in load distribution patterns on the facets and adjacent segments (Han et al., 2013, Zander et al., 2009). Furthermore, accurate task-specific ICR information is a crucial input for inverse kinematics-driven biomechanical models, as the estimation of muscle moment arms and, consequently, muscle and joint forces can be highly sensitive to small changes in the presumed location of the COR (Abouhossein et al., 2013, Han et al., 2013, Zhu et al., 2013) and, by association, the center of reaction (Bogduk et al., 1995, Schneider et al., 2005, Zander et al., 2016).

Although ICRs and centrode patterns have been estimated using the method of Reuleaux from a series of static radiographs (Gertzbein et al., 1984, Gertzbein et al., 1985, Gertzbein et al., 1986, Ogston et al., 1986), the lack of sufficient precision has hampered the confidence level in past reported data (Crisco et al., 1994, Pearcy et al., 1984). Developments in dynamic radiographic imaging techniques over the last decade, however, have overcome these limitations to afford more accurate measurement of in vivo vertebral motion during functional activities (Ahmadi et al., 2009, Aiyangar et al., 2015, Aiyangar et al., 2014, Anderst et al., 2008, Teyhen et al., 2007, Wong et al., 2004, Wu et al., 2014).

Our systematic endeavor to map three-dimensional (3D) kinematics of the healthy lumbar spine has been motivated by these developments. The current study investigates lumbar ICR migration patterns during a functional lifting task and poses the following hypotheses:

  • (1)

    ICR migration patterns vary across the individual lumbar segments, both in the anterior-posterior (AP) and superior-inferior (SI) directions. Specifically,

    • a.

      The range of ICR migration varies across the lumbar segments.

    • b.

      The locations of the ICRs, as defined relative to the inferior vertebra of a given intervertebral segment, vary across the segments.

  • (2)

    The magnitude of load lifted has a significant effect on the location and the migration range of the ICRs.

Section snippets

Materials and methods

With Institutional Review Board approval, 14 healthy participants (eight male, six female) between the ages of 19 and 30 years (24±2) and a waist size no greater than 89 cm (35 in) [x̅(S)=79±8 cm (31±3 in)] were recruited for the study. Mean height and weight of participants were 175 (±8) cm and 71 (±12) kg respectively. Participants reported no prior history of lower back disorders. All participants provided written, informed consent.

Starting from a trunk-flexed (~75° flexion) position,

Results

Of the 14 participants, data from three were omitted due to poor image quality. Six out of the 122 segmental ICR datasets (4.9%) processed were deemed outliers and excluded, as their AP or SI range of ICR migration exceeded 175% (~3× mean value), or their centrodes exceeded 250% of bone depth (~2× mean value) (Baillargeon and Anderst, 2013), or both.

Substantial migration of ICRs was observed at all segments (Fig. 2, Table 1). Barring a few exceptions, ICRs generally migrated from anterior to

Discussion

In order to better place current findings regarding ICR patterns in context with past studies, results are discussed further within the frame of three aspects of lumbar segmental translation: 1) amplitude of the centrode; (2) average COR location in the sagittal plane; and (3) direction of ICR migration vis-à-vis the corresponding rotational direction.

Conflicts of interest statement

The authors have no conflict of interest related to the manuscript or the work it describes.

Disclaimer

The findings and conclusions in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.

Acknowledgments

The work was funded by a research grant (R21OH00996) from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention/National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (CDC/NIOSH). Additional support was received through the Marie Sklowdoska-Curie Cofund postdoctoral fellowship award (EMPAPOSTDOCS 267161) and Ambizione Career Grant Award (PZ00P2_154855/1) from the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF). The authors thank Dr. Scott Tashman for technical advice on DSX data acquisition. The authors also

References (50)

  • H. Schmidt et al.

    The relation between the instantaneous center of rotation and facet joint forces - a finite element analysis

    Clin. Biomech.

    (2008)
  • D.M. Skrzypiec et al.

    Shear strength of the human lumbar spine

    Clin. Biomech.

    (2012)
  • C.W. Spoor et al.

    Rigid body motion calculated from spatial co-ordinates of markers

    J. Biomech.

    (1980)
  • G. Wu et al.

    ISB recommendation on definitions of joint coordinate system of various joints for the reporting of human joint motion – Part I: ankle, hip, and spine

    Int. Soc. Biomech. J. Biomech.

    (2002)
  • Q. Xia et al.

    In-vivo motion characteristics of lumbar vertebrae in sagittal and transverse planes

    J. Biomech.

    (2010)
  • T. Zander et al.

    Influence of different artificial disc kinematics on spine biomechanics

    Clin. Biomech.

    (2009)
  • T. Zander et al.

    Sensitivity analysis of the position of the intervertebral centres of reaction in upright standing – a musculoskeletal model investigation of the lumbar spine

    Med. Eng. Phys.

    (2016)
  • R. Zhu et al.

    Considerations when loading spinal finite element models with predicted muscle forces from inverse static analyses

    J. Biomech.

    (2013)
  • A. Abouhossein et al.

    Quantifying the centre of rotation pattern in a multi-body model of the lumbar spine

    Comput. Methods Biomech. Biomed. Eng.

    (2013)
  • A. Ahmadi et al.

    Kinematic analysis of dynamic lumbar motion in patients with lumbar segmental instability using digital videofluoroscopy

    Eur. Spine J.

    (2009)
  • A. Aiyangar et al.

    Apportionment of lumbar L2-S1 rotation across individual motion segments during a dynamic lifting task

    J. Biomech.

    (2015)
  • A.K. Aiyangar et al.

    Capturing three-dimensional in vivo lumbar intervertebral joint kinematics using dynamic stereo-x-ray imaging

    J. Biomech. Eng. T ASME

    (2014)
  • C.K. Anderson et al.

    A study of lumbosacral orientation under varied static loads

    Spine

    (1986)
  • W. Anderst et al.

    Motion path of the instant center of rotation in the cervical spine during in vivo dynamic flexion-extension: implications for artificial disc design and evaluation of motion quality following arthrodesis

    Spine

    (2013)
  • N. Bogduk et al.

    A biological basis for instantaneous centres of rotation of the vertebral column

    Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part H J. Eng. Med.

    (1995)
  • Cited by (25)

    • Intuitive assessment of modeled lumbar spinal motion by clustering and visualization of finite helical axes

      2021, Computers in Biology and Medicine
      Citation Excerpt :

      The thereby obtained set of points is thought to approximate the so-called centrode, i.e. the path of the instantaneous center of rotation in two dimensions. In the context of spinal movements, these projections are predominantly found in investigations of flexion-extension movements (sagittal plane) [2,4,33–39], but can likewise be found in investigations of lateral bending (frontal plane) [35,38,40,41] or axial rotation (transversal plane) [3,35,42]. The advantage of centrodes is their presentability, whereas their disadvantage is the loss of information, e.g. the cutting angles or the magnitude of rotational and translational parts.

    • ICR in human cadaveric specimens: An essential parameter to consider in a new lumbar disc prosthesis design

      2020, North American Spine Society Journal
      Citation Excerpt :

      With respect to the biomechanical specifications, based on our study, the implant should meet the following requirements: Adapts the equations of the movement of the intact ICR of the joint to the post-surgical ICR [3,88] Behaves as a shock absorbing mechanism [58]

    • Sensitivity of musculoskeletal model-based lumbar spinal loading estimates to type of kinematic input and passive stiffness properties

      2020, Journal of Biomechanics
      Citation Excerpt :

      This result is consistent with a previous musculoskeletal modeling study, which showed that the optimal COR location for minimizing JRF may vary for each instantaneous flexed position of the lumbar spine (Senteler et al., 2018). A preceding analysis of instantaneous CORs using the finite helical axis method also showed that these CORs migrated over the range of the lifting motion (Aiyangar et al., 2017). Since rhythm-based models had no translations, the fixed joint CORs could have additionally constrained the model, resulting in larger JRF estimates.

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text