Incidence of Compression-Induced Microinjuries in the Cartilage Endplate of the Spine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: In vitro biomechanical study. OBJECTIVE: This study investigated the incidence of microstructural endplate injuries caused by cyclic compression loading. The covarying effects of joint posture, loading duration, and peak compression variation were assessed. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The endplate is physiologically and functionally important for the maintenance of spine health. Despite the ability to radiographically diagnose and classify macroscopic endplate injuries, the mechanical mechanisms of injury initiation and progression remain largely unknown. METHODS: One hundred and fourteen porcine cervical spinal units were examined. All spinal units were exposed to preconditioning tests, followed by cyclic compression testing that differed by posture (flexed, neutral), loading duration (1000, 3000, 5000 cycles), and peak compression variation (10%, 20%, 40%). Microstructural injuries were examined via immunofluorescence staining for collagen I ( i.e. , subchondral bone) and collagen II ( i.e. , hyaline cartilage endplate). From the 678 acquired images, the incidence of node, avulsion, cartilage, and circumferential pore microinjuries were determined. The distribution of microinjuries between postures, spinal levels, and vertebrae were evaluated along with the associations of incidence and size of injuries with loading duration and variation. RESULTS: The incidence of avulsion injuries was significantly greater in caudal endplates (92%, P =0.006). No other injuries differed between vertebrae ( P ≥0.804) and no significant differences were observed between spinal units ( P ≥0.158). With respect to posture, 100% ( P <0.001) and 90% ( P <0.001) of avulsion and node injuries, respectively, occurred in flexed postures, whereas 82% ( P <0.001) of cartilage microinjuries occurred with neutral postures. Loading duration was significantly associated with microinjury incidence ( P <0.001) and lesion size ( P ≤0.003). CONCLUSION: Mechanical factors such as posture did not appreciably affect the incidence of endplate injury, but microinjury types were differently distributed between flexed and neutral postures. The duration of compression was shown to have an important role in the incidence of microinjury and lesion size.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".