The Effect of Nucleotomy on Lumbar Spine Mechanics in Compression and Shear Loading
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: An in vitro biomechanical investigation on human cadaveric specimens was conducted before and after nucleotomy. Endplate and vertebral body deformation patterns were measured under compression and shear loading, in addition to kinematics and disc pressure. OBJECTIVE: The working hypotheses of this study were that in compression, nucleotomy results in an altered deformation pattern of the endplate and that in shear, nucleotomy does not result in an altered endplate deformation pattern or disc pressure. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The pressure distributions within the intervertebral disc have been studied in compression loading but not in shear loading. Severe degeneration and surgical nucleotomy result in small nuclear pressure and altered loading distribution in compression. The effect of these changes on the vertebral endplate and the response under shear loads are not well understood. METHODS: Five L3-L4 and two L4-L5 functional spinal units were tested under compression and shear loading, intact and after nucleotomy. Vertebral body deformations, intradiscal pressure, and intervertebral kinematics were measured. A series of compression-type (maximum 1000 N) and shear-type (maximum 500 N) loads were applied. RESULTS: With nucleotomy, the disc pressure and the endplate strains decreased under compression, but the vertebral rim strains did not change. In shear, the vertebral rim and endplate strains did not change with nucleotomy. Disc pressure was lower in shear than in compression. CONCLUSION: Nucleotomy resulted in decreased disc pressure, decreased endplate deformation, and modified loading patterns onto the inferior vertebra in compression loading. However, nucleotomy did not appreciably affect the behavior of the disc in shear loading.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".