Effect of Spinal Level and Loading Conditions on the Production of Vertebral Burst Fractures in a Porcine Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Vertebral burst fractures are commonly studied with experimental animal models. There is however a lack of consensus as to what parameters are important to create an unstable burst fracture with a significant canal encroachment on such model. This study aims to assess the effect of the loading rate, flexion angle, spinal level, and their interactions on the production of a vertebral thoracolumbar burst fracture on a porcine model. Sixteen functional spinal units composed of three vertebrae were harvested from mature Yucatan minipigs. Two loading rates (0.01 and 500 mm/s), two flexion angles (0° and 15°), and two spinal levels (T11-T13 and T14-L2) were studied, following a full factorial experimental plan with one repetition. Compression was applied to each functional unit to create a vertebral fracture. The load-to-failure, loss of compressive stiffness, final canal encroachment, and fracture type were used as criteria to evaluate the resulting fracture. All specimens compressed without flexion resulted in burst fractures. Half of the specimens compressed with the 15° flexion angle resulted in compression fractures. Specimens positioned without flexion lost more of their compressive stiffness and had more significant canal encroachment. Fractured units compressed with a higher loading rate resulted in a greater loss of compressive stiffness. The spinal level had no significant effect on the resulting fractures. The main parameters which affect the resulting fracture are the loading rate and the flexion angle. A higher loading rate and the absence of flexion favors the production of burst fractures with a greater canal encroachment.
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".