Patient-specific numerical simulation of the spine is a useful tool both in clinic and research. While geometrical personalization of the spine is no more an issue, thanks to recent technological advances, non-invasive personalization of soft tissue’s mechanical properties remains a challenge. Ultrasound elastography is a relatively recent measurement technique allowing the evaluation of soft tissue’s elastic modulus through the measurement of shear wave speed. The aim of this study was to determine the feasibility of elastographic measurements in intervertebral disc. An in vitro approach was chosen to test the hypothesis that shear wave speed can be used to evaluate intervertebral disc mechanical properties and to assess measurement repeatability. In total, 11 oxtail intervertebral discs were tested in compression to determine their stiffness and apparent elastic modulus at rest and at 400 N. Elastographic measurements were performed in these two conditions and compared to these mechanical parameters. The protocol was repeated six times to determine elastographic measurement repeatability. Average shear wave speed over all samples was 5.3 ± 1.0 m/s, with a repeatability of 7% at rest and 4.6% at 400 N; stiffness and apparent elastic modulus were 266.3 ± 70.5 N/mm and 5.4 ± 1.1 MPa at rest, respectively, while at 400 N they were 781.0 ± 153.8 N/mm and 13.2 ± 2.4 MPa, respectively. Correlations were found between elastographic measurements and intervertebral disc mechanical properties; these preliminary results are promising for further in vivo application.
DrevelleXLafonYEbermeyerE. Analysis of idiopathic scoliosis progression by using numerical simulation. Spine2010; 35(10): E407–E412.
5.
VillemureIAubinCEDansereauJ. Simulation of progressive deformities in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis using a biomechanical model integrating vertebral growth modulation. J Biomech Eng2002; 124(6): 784–790.
6.
KurowskiPKuboA.The relationship of degeneration of the intervertebral disc to mechanical loading conditions on lumbar vertebrae. Spine1986; 11(7): 726–731.
7.
RubertéLMNatarajanRNAnderssonGBJ. Influence of single-level lumbar degenerative disc disease on the behavior of the adjacent segments – a finite element model study. J Biomech2009; 42(3): 341–348.
8.
RohlmannAZanderTSchmidtH. Analysis of the influence of disc degeneration on the mechanical behaviour of a lumbar motion segment using the finite element method. J Biomech2006; 39(13): 2484–2490.
9.
TropianoPThollonLArnouxPJ. Using a finite element model to evaluate human injuries application to the HUMOS model in whiplash situation. Spine2004; 29(16): 1709–1716.
10.
NealMLKerckhoffsR.Current progress in patient-specific modeling. Brief Bioinform2010; 11(1): 111–126.
11.
HumbertLDe GuiseJAAubertB. 3D reconstruction of the spine from biplanar X-rays using parametric models based on transversal and longitudinal inferences. Med Eng Phys2009; 31(6): 681–687.
12.
JolivetESandozBLaporteS. Fast 3D reconstruction of the rib cage from biplanar radiographs. Med Biol Eng Comput2010; 48(8): 821–828.
13.
DworzakJLameckerHBergJ. 3D reconstruction of the human rib cage from 2D projection images using a statistical shape model. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg2010; 5(2): 111–124.
14.
MittonDLandryCVéronS. 3D reconstruction method from biplanar radiography using non-stereocorresponding points and elastic deformable meshes. Med Biol Eng Comput2000; 38(2): 133–139.
15.
BenameurSMignotteMLabelleH. A hierarchical statistical modeling approach for the unsupervised 3-D biplanar reconstruction of the scoliotic spine. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng2005; 52(12): 2041–2057.
16.
TanakaNAnHSLimT-H. The relationship between disc degeneration and flexibility of the lumbar spine. Spine J2001; 1(1): 47–56.
17.
StokesIAWilderDGFrymoyerJW. Assessment of patients with low-back pain by biplanar radiographic measurement of intervertebral motion. Spine1981; 6(3): 233–240.
18.
PollyDWJrSturmPF.Traction versus supine side bending. Which technique best determines curve flexibility?Spine1998; 23(7): 804–808.
19.
MatsumotoTKitaharaHMinamiS. Flexibility in the scoliotic spine: three-dimensional analysis. J Spinal Disord1997; 10(2): 125–131.
20.
PetitYAubinCELabelleH.Patient-specific mechanical properties of a flexible multi-body model of the scoliotic spine. Med Biol Eng Comput2004; 42(1): 55–60.
21.
LafonYLafageVSteibJP. In vivo distribution of spinal intervertebral stiffness based on clinical flexibility tests. Spine2010; 35(2): 186–193.
22.
LittleJPAdamC.Towards determining soft tissue properties for modelling spine surgery: current progress and challenges. Med Biol Eng Comput2012; 50(2): 199–209.
23.
ReutlingerCHaslerCSchefflerK. Intraoperative determination of the load-displacement behavior of scoliotic spinal motion segments: preliminary clinical results. Eur Spine J2012; 21(Suppl. 6): S860–S867.
24.
CampanaSCharpailEde GuiseJA. Relationships between viscoelastic properties of lumbar intervertebral disc and degeneration grade assessed by MRI. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater2011; 4(4): 593–599.
25.
PériéDIatridisJCDemersCN. Assessment of compressive modulus, hydraulic permeability and matrix content of trypsin-treated nucleus pulposus using quantitative MRI. J Biomech2006; 39(8): 1392–1400.
26.
MwaleFDemersCNMichalekAJ. Evaluation of quantitative magnetic resonance imaging, biochemical and mechanical properties of trypsin-treated intervertebral discs under physiological compression loading. J Magn Reson Imaging2008; 27(3): 563–573.
27.
RecuerdaMPerieDGilbertG. Assessment of mechanical properties of isolated bovine intervertebral discs from multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging. BMC Musculoskelet Disord2012; 13(1): 195.
28.
PerieDKordaDIatridisJC.Confined compression experiments on bovine nucleus pulposus and annulus fibrosus: sensitivity of the experiment in the determination of compressive modulus and hydraulic permeability. J Biomech2005; 38(11): 2164–2171.
29.
RecuerdaMCoteSPVillemureI. Influence of experimental protocols on the mechanical properties of the intervertebral disc in unconfined compression. J Biomech Eng2011; 133(7): 071006.
30.
SchmidtHGalbuseraFRohlmannA. What have we learned from finite element model studies of lumbar intervertebral discs in the past four decades?J Biomech2013; 46(14): 2342–2355.
31.
OphirJCespedesIPonnekantiH. Elastography: a quantitative method for imaging the elasticity of biological tissues. Ultrason Imaging1991; 13(2): 111–134.
32.
TanterMBercoffJAthanasiouA. Quantitative assessment of breast lesion viscoelasticity: initial clinical results using supersonic shear imaging. Ultrasound Med Biol2008; 34(9): 1373–1386.
33.
GennissonJLDeffieuxTMaceE. Viscoelastic and anisotropic mechanical properties of in vivo muscle tissue assessed by supersonic shear imaging. Ultrasound Med Biol2010; 36(5): 789–801.
34.
AthanasiouATardivonATanterM. Breast lesions: quantitative elastography with supersonic shear imaging – preliminary results. Radiology2010; 256(1): 297–303.
35.
FerraioliGTinelliCDal BelloB. Accuracy of real-time shear wave elastography for assessing liver fibrosis in chronic hepatitis C: a pilot study. Hepatology2012; 56(6): 2125–2133.
36.
BavuÉGennissonJ-LCouadeM. Noninvasive in vivo liver fibrosis evaluation using supersonic shear imaging: a clinical study on 113 hepatitis C virus patients. Ultrasound Med Biol2011; 37(9): 1361–1373.
37.
ArdaKCiledagNAktasE. Quantitative assessment of normal soft-tissue elasticity using shear-wave ultrasound elastography. AJR Am J Roentgenol2011; 197(3): 532–536.
38.
GennissonJLGrenierNHubrechtR. Multiwave technology introducing shear wave elastography of the kidney: pre-clinical study on a kidney fibrosis model and clinical feasibility study on 49 human renal transplants. In: IEEE international ultrasonics symposium 2010, San Diego, CA, 11–14 October 2010. New York: IEEE.
39.
GennissonJLMullerMAmiO. Shear wave elastography in obstetrics: quantification of cervix elasticity and uterine contraction. In: IEEE international ultrasonics symposium 2011, Orlando, FL, 18–21 October 2011. New York: IEEE.
40.
FungYCSkalakR.Biomechanics: mechanical properties of living tissues. J Biomech Eng1981; 103(4): 231–298.
41.
BercoffJTanterMFinkM.Sonic boom in soft materials: the elastic Cerenkov effect. Appl Phys Lett2004; 84(12): 2202–2204.
42.
RoyerDGennissonJLDeffieuxT. On the elasticity of transverse isotropic soft tissues (L). J Acoust Soc Am2011; 129(5): 2757–2760.
43.
BercoffJTanterMFinkM.Supersonic shear imaging: a new technique for soft tissue elasticity mapping. IEEE T Ultrason Ferr2004; 51(4): 396–409.
44.
VergariCPourcelotPHoldenL. True stress and Poisson’s ratio of tendons during loading. J Biomech2011; 44(4): 719–724.
45.
LeeJKohDOngCN.Statistical evaluation of agreement between two methods for measuring a quantitative variable. Comput Biol Med1989; 19(1): 61–70.
46.
FujitaYWagnerDRBivijiAA. Anisotropic shear behavior of the annulus fibrosus: effect of harvest site and tissue prestrain. Med Eng Phys2000; 22(5): 349–357.
47.
MarchandFAhmedAM.Investigation of the laminate structure of lumbar disc anulus fibrosus. Spine1990; 15(5): 402–410.
48.
DescrimesJLAubinCESkalliW. Introduction des facettes articulaires dans une modélisation par éléments finis de la colonne vertébrale et du thorax scoliotique: aspects mécaniques. Rachis1995; 7(6): 301–314.
49.
ClinJAubinC-EParentS. Comparison of the biomechanical 3D efficiency of different brace designs for the treatment of scoliosis using a finite element model. Eur Spine J2010; 19(7): 1169–1178.
50.
RaceABroomNDRobertsonP.Effect of loading rate and hydration on the mechanical properties of the disc. Spine2000; 25(6): 662–669.
51.
CampanaS.Evaluation des relations entre propriétés biomécaniques et imagerie: étude in vitro du disque intervertébral. Paris: Arts et Métiers ParisTech, 2004.
52.
O’ConnellGDJacobsNTSenS. Axial creep loading and unloaded recovery of the human intervertebral disc and the effect of degeneration. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater2011; 4(7): 933–942.
53.
CannellaMArthurAAllenS. The role of the nucleus pulposus in neutral zone human lumbar intervertebral disc mechanics. J Biomech2008; 41(10): 2104–2111.
54.
SheaMTakeuchiTYWittenbergRH. A comparison of the effects of automated percutaneous diskectomy and conventional diskectomy on intradiscal pressure, disk geometry, and stiffness. J Spinal Disord1994; 7(4): 317–325.
55.
Van der VeenAJvan DieenJHNadortA. Intervertebral disc recovery after dynamic or static loading in vitro: is there a role for the endplate?J Biomech2007; 40(10): 2230–2235.
56.
MunHSChoiSHKookSH. Validation of intra- and interobserver reproducibility of shearwave elastography: phantom study. Ultrasonics2013; 53(5): 1039–1043.
