An In Vitro Model of Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: A biomechanical human cadaveric study. OBJECTIVE: To create a biomechanical model of low-grade degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS), defined by anterior listhesis, for future testing of spinal instrumentation. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Current spinal implants are used to treat a multitude of conditions that range from herniated discs to degenerative diseases. The optimal stiffness of these instrumentation systems for each specific spinal condition is unknown. Ex vivo models representing degenerative spinal conditions are scarce in the literature. A model of DLS for implant testing will enhance our understanding of implant-spine behavior for specific populations of patients. METHODS: Four incremental surgical destabilizations were performed on 8 lumbar functional spinal units. The facet complex and intervertebral disc were targeted to represent the tissue changes associated with DLS. After each destabilization, the specimen was tested with: (1) applied shear force (-50 to 250 N) with a constant axial compression force (300 N) and (2) applied pure moments in flexion-extension, lateral bending and axial rotation (±5 Nm). Relative motion between the 2 vertebrae was tracked with a motion capture system. The effect of specimen condition on intervertebral motion was assessed for shear and flexibility testing. RESULTS: Shear translation increased, specimen stiffness decreased and range of motion increased with specimen destabilization (P < 0.0002). A mean anterior translation of 3.1 mm (SD 1.1 mm) was achieved only after destabilization of both the facet complex and disc. Of the 5 specimen conditions, 3 were required to achieve grade 1 DLS: (1) intact, (3) a 4-mm facet gap, and (5) a combined nucleus and annulus injury. CONCLUSION: Destabilization of both the facet complex and disc was required to achieve anterior listhesis of 3.1 mm consistent with a grade 1 DLS under an applied shear force of 250 N. Sufficient listhesis was measured without radical specimen resection. Important anatomical structures for supporting spinal instrumentation were preserved such that this model can be used in future to characterize behavior of novel instrumentation prior to clinical trials.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".