A Comparison of Five Animal Models for Acute Intervertebral Disc Herniation Research
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Study Design Microstructural investigation of mechanical load induced acute disc herniation on five animal models. Objective To compare how spinal discs in different animal models herniate under a standardized complex compressive load. Summary of Background Data Animal models in disc herniation research offer reduced degeneration‐associated variability, lower cost, and greater availability compared to human specimens. However, there is limited consensus regarding which species is best suited for modeling human herniation, making a comprehensive comparison of species‐specific herniation mechanisms necessary. Materials and Methods A standardized shear and compressive load, designed to herniate intervertebral discs, was applied to isolated discs of five cadaveric animal models ( n = 30, 6 specimens per group): bovine tail, bovine lumbar, ovine lumbar, porcine lumbar, and porcine cervical. The segments were flexed (7°), and a shear‐compressive load was applied at a crosshead displacement rate of 40 mm min −1 , until a force drop, or a displacement limit was reached (~80% of disc height). Microstructural analysis was undertaken to identify failure modes. Results Clinically relevant herniation features were observed in all models—including endplate and annulus fibrosus (AF) tearing, AF delamination, vertebral body (VB) fracture, nucleus pulposus (NP) extrusion into VB, and radial NP movement. Bovine lumbar, porcine cervical, and porcine lumbar segments exhibited high rates of radial NP movement (84%, 100%, and 67%, respectively), with ovine lumbar discs displaying VB fracture (84%) and NP extrusions into the VB (67%). Bovine tail discs showed minimal damage but were characterized by sequential lamellar AF tears (67%). Conclusions Porcine cervical, bovine lumbar, and porcine lumbar discs are suitable for annulus‐failure herniation research, although porcine cervical discs may be the most appropriate due to exhibiting the highest rate of relevant damages. Ovine lumbar discs are relevant for studying endplate junction failure herniations, and bovine tail discs are appropriate for implant‐related studies.
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 | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".