Uncertainty analysis of material properties and morphology parameters in numerical models regarding the motion of lumbar vertebral segments

Abstract

The kinematics of a spinal motion segment is determined by the material properties of the soft-tissue and the morphology. The material properties can vary within subjects and between vertebral levels, leading to a wide possible range of motion of a spinal segment independently on its morphology. The goal of this numerical study was to identify the most influential material parameters concerning the kinematics of a spinal motion segment and their plausible ranges. Then, a method was tested to deduce the material properties automatically, based on a given ROM and morphology. A fully parametric finite element model of the morphology and material properties of a lumbar spinal motion segment was developed. The impact of uncertainty of twelve spinal material parameters, as well as the size of the gap between the articular surfaces of the facet joints was examined. The simulation results were compared to our own in vitro data. The flexibility of a lumbar segment was especially influenced by the properties of the anterior annulus region, the facet gap size and the interspinous ligament. The high degree of uncertainty in the material properties and facet gap size published in the literature can lead to a wide scatter in the motion of a spinal segment, with a range of 6°-17° in the intact condition in flexion/extension, from 5°-22° in lateral bending and from 3°-14° in axial rotation. Statistical analysis of the variability might help to estimate the sensitivity and total uncertainty propagated through biomechanical simulations, affecting the reliability of the predictions.

Keywords:

• biomechanics
• spine
• finite element simulation
• material
• uncertainty analysis
• lumbar spinal segment

Acknowledgment

This work was supported by the German Research Foundation (DFG), Project WI 1352/20-1 and WI 1352/17-2. The authors have no conflict of interest.

Discloser statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.