• Logo
  • SBMUJournals

Biomechanical Assessment of Cervical Spine with Artificial Disc during Axial Rotation, Flexion and Extension

Seifollah Gholampour, Nikoo Soleimani, Fateme Zare Karizi, Ali Reza Zalii, Nooshin Masoudian, Amir Saeed Seddighi




Background: The cervical spine is the most vulnerable part of the vertebral column and the rotational movements are the most dangerous movements which may cause damages to cervical spine. A good treatment option for the cervical disc disease is the replacement of a damaged disc with an artificial disc that has shown satisfactory clinical results.

Methods: The C4 to C6 vertebrae of a normal subject and a person with an artificial disc between the vertebrae C5 and C6 were 3d modelled and then analyzed using FEM. The results of stress and deformationin both subjects were calculated and compared for three rotational head movements: axial rotation, flexion and extension. A distributed load of 73.6 N was used to simulate the head weight and a moment of 1.8 N.m was used to create all three rotational movements.

Results: The maximum Von Mises stress in the normal subject during the axial rotation was respectively 2.2 and 1.8 times greater than the maximum stress during flexion and extension. These numbers were 2.6 and 2.3 in the subject with artificial disc.Following the artificial disc replacement, the cervical spine strength against the extension improved about 2.7%, however, the strength in axial rotation and flexion decreased 6.9% and 24.3%, respectively. The maximum values of deformation in the normal subject during flexion, extension and axial rotation were 2.8, 2.8 and 2 times of the values in the subject with artificial disc during the similar movements.

Conclusion: The flexion and extension involve risks of hurting the cervical spine, however, the axial rotation is much more dangerous regarding the damages it may cause especially to the C5/6 intervertebral disc. Numerically, there is a much greater possibility of cervical spine injury during axial rotation.


Flexion and extension; axial rotation; cervical spine; artificial disc; head movement.


Zafarparandeh I, Erbulut DU, Lazoglu I, Ozer AF. Development of a finite element model of the human cervical spine. Turkish neurosurgery. 2013 Dec;24(3):312-8

Smucker JD, Sasso RC. Anterior cervical disc replacement: Indications, techniques, and outcomes. In Seminars in Spine Surgery 2015 Dec 1. WB Saunders.

Ronald HMAB, Roland DD, Paul P, Jacques VL. Comparison of biomechanical properties of cervical artificial disc prosthesis: A review, clinical neurology and neurosurgery. 2008 Dec 110; 10, 963–967.

Jin YJ, Park SB, Kim MJ, Kim KJ, Kim HJ. An analysis of heterotopic ossification in cervical disc arthroplasty: a novel morphologic classification of an ossified mass. The Spine Journal. 2013 Apr 30;13(4):408-20.

Hou Y, Liu Y, Yuan W, Wang X, Chen H, Yang L, Zhang Y. Cervical kinematics and radiological changes after Discover artificial disc replacement versus fusion. The Spine Journal. 2014 Jun 1;14(6):867-77.

Yeh CH, Hung CW, Kao CH, Chao CM. Medium-term outcomes of artificial disc replacement for severe cervical disc narrowing. Journal of Acute Disease. 2014 Dec 31;3(4):290-5.

Skeppholm M, Svedmark P, Noz ME, Maguire Jr GQ, Olivecrona H, Olerud C. Evaluation of mobility and stability in the Discover artificial disc: an in vivo motion study using high-accuracy 3D CT data. Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine. 2015 Sep;23(3):383-9.

Dahl MC, Jacobsen S, Metcalf N Jr, Sasso R, Ching RP. A comparison of the shock-absorbing properties of cervical disc prosthesis bearing materials. SAS J. 2011 Jun 1;5(2):48-54

Colle KO, Butler JB, Reyes PM, Newcomb AG, Theodore N, Crawford NR. Biomechanical evaluation of a metal-on-metal cervical intervertebral disc prosthesis. The Spine Journal. 2013 Nov 30;13(11):1640-9.

Chen J, Xu L, Jia YS, Sun Q, Li JY, Zheng CY, Bai CX, Yu QS. Cervical anterior hybrid technique with bi-level Bryan artificial disc replacement and adjacent segment fusion for cervical myelopathy over three consecutive segments. Journal of Clinical Neuroscience. 2016 May 31;27:59-62.

Azimi P, Shahzadi S, Mohammadi HR, Alizadeh P, Shahzadi A. Surgery outcomes and functionality in patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy. International Clinical Neuroscience Journal. 2014 Nov 25;1(2):48-50.

Galbusera F, Bellini CM, Raimondi MT, Fornari M, Assietti R. Cervical spine biomechanics following implantation of a disc prosthesis. Med Eng Phys. 2008 Nov;30(9):1127-33.

Park WM, Kim YH, Kim K, Kim KT, Lee SH, et al. Effect of Artificial Disc Position on Spine Biomechanics in the Cervical Spine: A Finite Element Study. ORS 2011 Annual Meeting

Lin CY, Chuang SY, Chiang CJ, Tsuang YH, Chen WP. Finite element analysis of cervical spine with different constrained types of total disc replacement. Journal of Mechanics in Medicine and Biology. 2014 Jun;14(03):1450038.

Yu CC, Liu P, Huang DG, Jiang YH, Feng H, Hao DJ. A new cervical artificial disc prosthesis based on physiological curvature of end plate: a finite element analysis. Spine J. 2016 Jun 23. pii: S1529-9430(16)30277-7.

Lee JH, Park WM, Kim YH, Jahng TA. A biomechanical analysis of an artificial disc with a shock-absorbing core property by using whole-cervical spine finite element analysis. Spine. 2016 Jan.

De Bruijn E, Van der Helm FC, Happee R. Analysis of isometric cervical strength with a nonlinear musculoskeletal model with 48 degrees of freedom. Multibody System Dynamics. 2016 Apr 1;36(4):339-62.

Gholampour S, Soleimani N, Zalii AR, Karizi FZ, Seddighi A. Numerical simulation of the cervical spine in a normal subject and a patient with intervertebral cage under various loadings and in various positions. International Clinical Neuroscience Journal. In press.

Coelho PG, Fernandes PC, Folgado J, Fernandes PR. Development of a Spinal Fusion Cage by Multiscale Modelling: Application to the Human Cervical Spine. Procedia Engineering. 2015 Dec 31;110:183-90.

Ghaemi H, Bahramshahi N. Evaluation of the effect of cervical spine compression and sagittal moments on the spinal cord using finite element method. International Journal of Biomedical Engineering and Technology. 2012 Jan 1;9(3):260-76.

Yang SW, Chien YY, Chen MH. Change of Mobility and Stress Morphology due to Different Types of Artificial Cervical Spine Implementation: a Finite Element Analysis. In Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering 2014 (Vol. 2).

Teo EC, Paul JP, Evans JH. Finite element stress analysis of a cadaver second cervical vertebra. Med Biol Eng Comput. 1994 Mar 32(2):236-8.

Cheng CK, Chiang MF, Teng JM, et al. Finite Element Analysis of Cage Subsidence in Cervical Interbody Fusion. Journal of Medical and Biological Engineering 2004 Nov 24;4:201-208.

Sanghita B, Greenwald S, Goel VK: Cervical Artificial Disc Wear: The Influence Of Surgical Placement. Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons 2012 Feb 7-11. San Francisco.

Moroney SP, Schultz AB, Miller JA. Analysis and measurement of neck loads. J Orthop Res. 1988;6(5):713-20.

Moroney SP, Schultz AB, Miller JA, Andersson GB. Load-displacement properties of lower cervical spine motion segments. J Biomech. 1988;21(9):769-79.

Hall, Susan J. Basic biomechanics. Boston, Mass., McGraw-Hill, 2007.

Beer F. Statics and mechanics of materials. McGraw-Hill Higher Education; 2016 Mar 18.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.22037/icnj.v3i2.13432


  • There are currently no refbacks.