Can the sheep model fully represent the human model for the functional evaluation of cervical interbody fusion cages?
Biomechanics and Modeling in Mechanobiology, ISSN: 1617-7940, Vol: 18, Issue: 3, Page: 607-616
2019
- 9Citations
- 37Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
Sheep model is the most favourable choice for animal study for functional evaluation of the cervical fusion prostheses before clinical application; however, significantly large differences between sheep and human existed in terms of morphological characteristics and daily-activity motions. Questions should be raised as whether the differences between the two species have influence on the reliability of sheep model. Finite element models (FEM) of the cervical spinal system were built to characterize the differences between the two species with respect to the range of motion (ROM) and biomechanical behaviour, and experimental cadaver tests on both species were employed for validation purposes. Results indicate that sheep model represents the worst-case scenario of the human model with exaggerated stresses (up to 3 times more) and ROM (up to 10 times more). Moreover, sheep model is very sensitive to the variation of prostheses design, whilst human model does not, which denotes that the sheep model provides a rather amplified effect of a certain design for its biomechanical performance. Therefore, caution needs to be taken when sheep models were used as the animal model for functional evaluation over various design, and the FEM built in this study can be employed as an effective methodology for performance evaluation of cage prostheses of cervical spine.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85058966205&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10237-018-1104-x; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30570674; http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10237-018-1104-x; https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10237-018-1104-x; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10237-018-1104-x
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know