Metastatic Burst Fracture Risk Prediction Using Biomechanically Based Equations

Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research

Volumn 419, Issue , 2004, Pages 83-90

  Roth, Sandra E ^a   Mousavi, Payam ^a   Finkelstein, Joel ^a   Chow, Edward ^a   Kreder, Hans ^a   Whyne, Cari M ^a  

^a SUNNYBROOK RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIOMECHANICS; BONE DENSITY; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; FEMALE; FRACTURE; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; INTERVERTEBRAL DISK; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; OSTEOLYSIS; PRESSURE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; RISK ASSESSMENT; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SPINE METASTASIS; TUMOR VOLUME; WEIGHT BEARING;

EID: 1442280117     PISSN: 0009921X     EISSN: 15281132     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00003086-200402000-00015     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Constans JP, deDevitiis E, Donzelli R, et al. Spinal metastases with neurologic manifestations: Review of 600 cases. J Neurosurg. 1983;3:371-377.
2. DeWald RL, Bridwell KH, Prodromas C, et al. Reconstructive spinal surgery as palliation for metastatic malignancies of the spine. Spine. 1985;10:21-26.
3. Dimar JR, Voor MJ, Zhang YM, et al. A human cadaver model for determination of pathologic fracture threshold from tumorous destruction of the vertebral body. Spine. 1998;23:1209-1214.
4. Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology. 1982;143:29-36.
5. McAfee PC, Zdeblick TA. Tumors of the thoracic and lumbar spine: Surgical treatment via the anterior approach. J Spinal Disord. 1989;2:145-154.
6. McGowan DP, Hipp JA, Takeuchi T, et al. Strength reductions from trabecular destruction within thoracic vertebrae. J Spinal Disord. 1993;6:130-136.
7. Schultz A, Andersson G, Ortengren R, et al. Loads on the lumbar spine, validation of a biomechanical analysis by measurements of intradiscal pressures and myoelectric signals. J Bone Joint Surg. 1982;64A:713-720.
8. Silva MJ, Hipp JA, McGowan DP, et al. Strength reductions of thoracic vertebrae in the presence of transcortical osseous defects: Effects of defect location, pedicle disruption, and defect size. Eur Spine J. 1993;2:118-125.
9. Steiger P, Block JE, Steiger S, et al. Spinal bone mineral density measured with quantitative CT: Effect of region of interest, vertebral level, and technique. Radiology. 1990;175:537-543.
10. Taneichi H, Kaneda K, Takeda N, et al. Risk factors and probability of vertebral body collapse in metastases of the thoracic and lumbar spine. Spine. 1997;22:239-245.
11. Whealan KM, Kwak SD, Tedrow JR, et al. Noninvasive imaging predicts failure load of the spine with simulated osteolytic defects. J Bone Joint Surg. 2000;82A:1240-1251.
12. Whyne CM, Hu SS, Lotz JC. Parametric finite element analysis of vertebral bodies affected by tumors. J Biomech. 2001;34:1317-1324.
13. Whyne CM, Hu SS, Lotz JC. Burst fracture in the metastatically involved spine. Part I: Development, validation, and parametric analysis of a three-dimensional Poroelastic Finite Element Model. Spine. 2003;28:652-660.
14. Whyne CM, Hu SS, Lotz JC. Burst fracture in the metastatically involved spine. Part II: Biomechanically derived guideline equations for risk prediction. J Spinal Disord. 2003;2:180-185.
15. Whyne CM, Hu SS, Workman KL, et al. Biphasic material properties of lytic bone metastases. Ann Biomed Eng. 2000;28:1154-1158.
16. Windhagen HJ, Hipp JA, Silva MJ, et al. Predicting failure of thoracic vertebrae with simulated and actual metastatic defects. Clin Orthop. 1997;344:313-319.
17. Windhagen HJ, Hipp JA, Silva MJ, et al. Postfracture instability of vertebrae with simulated defects can be predicted from computed tomography data. Spine. 2000;25:1775-1781.
18. Wong DA, Fornaiser VL, McNab I. Spinal metastases: The obvious, the occult, and the imposters. Spine. 1990;15:1-3.