A biomechanical study of the charleston brace for the treatment of scoliosis

Spine

Volumn 35, Issue 19, 2010, Pages

  Clin, Julien ^a,b   Aubin, Carl Eric ^a,b   Parent, Stefan ^b   Labelle, Hubert ^b  

^a ÉCOLE POLYTECHNIQUE DE MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MONTREAL   (Canada)

Author keywords

biomechanics; Charleston brace; finite element model; scoliosis

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIOMECHANICS; BODY MOVEMENT; BRACE; CASE REPORT; CHARLESTON BRACE; GEOMETRY; HUMAN; PELVIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SCOLIOSIS; SPINE; THORAX;

BIOMECHANICS; BRACES; COMPUTER SIMULATION; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; FEASIBILITY STUDIES; FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS; GRAVITATION; HUMANS; IMAGING, THREE-DIMENSIONAL; MODELS, ANATOMIC; PELVIS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RIBS; SCOLIOSIS; SPINE; STRESS, MECHANICAL; SUPINE POSITION; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 77956416476     PISSN: 03622436     EISSN: 15281159     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181c5b5fa     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Price CT, Scott DS, Reed FE Jr, et al. Nighttime bracing for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis with the Charleston bending brace. Preliminary report. Spine 1990;15:1294-1299
2. Hooper R, Reed F, Price C. The Charleston brace. SRS bracing manual. Available at: . 2003.
3. Price CT, Scott DS, Reed FR Jr, et al. Nighttime bracing for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis with the Charleston bending brace: long-term follow-up. J Pediatr Orthop 1997;17:703-707
4. Trivedi JM, Thomson JD. Results of Charleston bracing in skeletally immature patients with idiopathic scoliosis. J Pediatr Orthop 2001;21:277-280
5. Gepstein R, Leitner Y, Zohar E, et al. Effectiveness of the Charleston bending brace in the treatment of single-curve idiopathic scoliosis. J Pediatr Orthop 2002;22:84-87
6. Howard A, Wright JG, Hedden D. A comparative study of TLSO, Charleston, and Milwaukee braces for idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 1998;23:2404-2411
7. Katz DE, Richards BS, Browne RH, et al. A comparison between the Boston brace and the Charleston bending brace in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 1997;22:1302-1312
8. Andriacchi TP, Schultz AB, Belytschko TB, et al. Milwaukee brace correction of idiopathic scoliosis. A biomechanical analysis and a retrospective study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1976;58:806-815
9. Perie D, Aubin CE, Petit Y, et al. Boston brace correction in idiopathic scoliosis: a biomechanical study. Spine 2003;28:1672-1677
10. Perie D, Aubin CE, Petit Y, et al. Personalized biomechanical simulations of orthotic treatment in idiopathic scoliosis. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 2004;19:190-195
11. Gignac D, Aubin CE, Dansereau J, et al. Optimization method for 3D bracing correction of scoliosis using a finite element model. Eur Spine J 2000;9:185-190
12. Patwardhan AG, Bunch WH, Meade KP, et al. A biomechanical analog of curve progression and orthotic stabilization in idiopathic scoliosis. J Bio-mech 1986;19:103-117
13. Wynarsky GT, Schultz AB. Optimization of skeletal configuration: studies of scoliosis correction biomechanics. J Biomech 1991;24:721-732
14. Clin J, Aubin CE, Labelle H. Virtual prototyping of a brace design for the correction of scoliotic deformities. Med Biol Eng Comput 2007;45:467-473
15. Aubin CE, Descrimes JL, Dansereau J, et al. [Geometrical modeling of the spine and the thorax for the biomechanical analysis of scoliotic deformities using the finite element method]. Ann Chir 1995;49:749-761
16. Delorme S, Petit Y, de Guise JA, et al. Assessment of the 3-D reconstruction and high-resolution geometrical modeling of the human skeletal trunk from 2-D radiographic images. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2003;50:989-998
17. Kadoury S, Cheriet F, Dansereau J, et al. Three-dimensional reconstruction of the scoliotic spine and pelvis from uncalibrated biplanar x-ray images. J Spinal Disord Tech 2007;20:160-167 (Pubitemid 46588329)
18. Pazos V, Cheriet F, Danserau J, et al. Reliability of trunk shape measurements based on 3-D surface reconstructions. Eur Spine J 2007;16:1882-1891
19. Fortin D, Cheriet F, Beausejour M, et al. A 3D visualization tool for the design and customization of spinal braces. Comput Med Imaging Graph 2007;31:614-624
20. Aubin CE, Dansereau J, de Guise JA, et al. [A study of biomechanical coupling between spine and rib cage in the treatment by orthosis of scoliosis]. Ann Chir 1996;50:641-650
21. Perie D, Aubin CE, Lacroix M, et al. Biomechanical modelling of orthotic treatment of the scoliotic spine including a detailed representation of the brace-torso interface. Med Biol Eng Comput 2004;42:339-344
22. Petit Y, Aubin CE, Labelle H. Patient-specific mechanical properties of a flexible multi-body model of the scoliotic spine. Med Biol Eng Comput 2004;42:55-60.
23. Cheng CK, Chen HH, Chen CS, et al. Segment inertial properties of Chinese adults determined from magnetic resonance imaging. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 2000;15:559-566
24. Liu YK, Laborde JM, Van Buskirk WC. Inertial properties of a segmented cadaver trunk: their implications in acceleration injuries. Aerosp Med 1971; 42:650-657
25. Pearsall DJ, Reid JG, Livingston LA. Segmental inertial parameters of the human trunk as determined from computed tomography. Ann Biomed Eng 1996;24:198-210.
26. Pearsall DJ, Reid JG, Ross R. Inertial properties of the human trunk of males determined from magnetic resonance imaging. Ann Biomed Eng 1994;22: 692-706.
27. Sanders JE, Greve JM, Mitchell SB, et al. Material properties of commonly-used interface materials and their static coefficients of friction with skin and socks. J Rehabil Res Dev 1998;35:161-176
28. Zhang M, Mak AF. In vivo friction properties of human skin. Prosthet Orthot Int 1999;23:135-141
29. Mac-Thiong JM, Petit Y, Aubin CE, et al. Biomechanical evaluation of the Boston brace system for the treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: relationship between strap tension and brace interface forces. Spine 2004; 29:26-32.
30. Delorme S, Labelle H, Poitras B, et al. Pre-, intra-, and postoperative three-dimensional evaluation of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. J Spinal Disord 2000;13:93-101.
31. Roaf R. Vertebral growth and its mechanical control. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1960;42:40-59.
32. Stokes IA, Aronsson DD, Dimock AN, et al. Endochondral growth in growth plates of three species at two anatomical locations modulated by mechanical compression and tension. J Orthop Res 2006;24:1327-1334
33. Villemure I, Chung MA, Seck CS, et al. Static compressive loading reduces the mRNA expression of type II and X collagen in rat growth-plate chondrocytes during postnatal growth. Connect Tissue Res 2005;46:211-219
34. Villemure I, Cloutier L, Matyas JR, et al. Non-uniform strain distribution within rat cartilaginous growth plate under uniaxial compression. J Biomech 2007;40:149-156
35. Frost HM. Skeletal structural adaptations to mechanical usage (SATMU): 3. The hyaline cartilage modeling problem. Anat Rec 1990;226:423-432
36. Frost HM. Skeletal structural adaptations to mechanical usage (SATMU): 1. Redefining Wolff's law: the bone modeling problem. Anat Rec 1990;226:403-413
37. Stokes IA, Gwadera J, Dimock A, et al. Modulation of vertebral and tibial growth by compression loading: diurnal versus full-time loading. J Orthop Res 2005;23:188-195
38. Meir AR, Fairbank JC, Jones DA, et al. High pressures and asymmetrical stresses in the scoliotic disc in the absence of muscle loading. Scoliosis 2007;2:4.
39. Meir A, McNally DS, Fairbank JC, et al. The internal pressure and stress environment of the scoliotic intervertebral disc-a review. Proc Inst Mech Eng [H] 2008;222:209-219
40. Lamarre ME, Parent S, Labelle H, et al. Assessment of spinal flexibility in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: suspension versus side-bending radiography. Spine 2009;34:591-597