Comparison of human lumbar disc pressure characteristics during simulated spinal manipulation vs. spinal mobilization

Wang,Fei; Zhang,Jun; Feng,Wei; Liu,Qiang; Yang,Xianwen; Zhang,Hui; Han,Lei; Min,Yaqing; Zhao,Ping

doi:10.3892/mmr.2018.9591

Comparison of human lumbar disc pressure characteristics during simulated spinal manipulation vs. spinal mobilization

Authors:
- Fei Wang
- Jun Zhang
- Wei Feng
- Qiang Liu
- Xianwen Yang
- Hui Zhang
- Lei Han
- Yaqing Min
- Ping Zhao
View Affiliations

Affiliations: Department of TCM Manipulative Orthopedics, Air Force General Hospital of PLA, Beijing 100142, P.R. China, Department of Sinew Injury Manual Therapy Research, Wangjing Hospital of China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing 100102, P.R. China, Department of Internal Medicine, Guangdong Province Corps Hospital of Chinese People's Armed Police Forces, Guangzhou, Guangdong 510507, P.R. China, Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Beijing DCN Orthopedic Hospital, Beijing 100143, P.R. China
Published online on: October 25, 2018 https://doi.org/10.3892/mmr.2018.9591
Pages: 5709-5716

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Metrics: Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Cited By (CrossRef): 0 citations Loading Articles...

Abstract

The present study aimed to investigate the differences in human lumbar intradiscal pressure (IDP) characteristics during simulated spinal manipulation and spinal mobilization. A total of 12 adult fresh lumbar spinal specimens (T12‑S2) were randomly divided into two groups. The parameters of simulated spinal mobilization were as follows: Preload angle, 15˚ (speed, 3˚/sec); maximum angle, 20˚ (speed, 1˚/sec); and 9 N horizontal force to the L5 spinous process. The parameters of simulated spinal manipulation were as follows: Preload angle, 15˚ (speed, 3˚/sec); impulse angle, 20˚ (impulse speed, 33˚/sec) and 22 N horizontal force to the L5 spinous process. The maximal IDP during both techniques was greater than the initial and end pressures (P<0.01). There was no difference between the initial and end IDP (P>0.05). The maximal IDP on the rotating side was greater than that on the contralateral side during the two techniques (P<0.05). There was no difference in both initial and end IDPs between the two sides (P>0.05). There was no difference in the maximal IDP between the two techniques (P>0.05). The ascending speed of IDP during manipulation was faster than during mobilization (P<0.01), while there was no difference in the descending speed between the two techniques (P>0.05). The maximal IDP on the rotating side was greater than the contralateral side during simulated spinal mobilization and manipulation (P<0.05). The ascending speed of IDP was faster during manipulation than mobilization (P<0.01). Therefore, thrust manipulation may have more instant impact to discs than mobilization.

View Figures

View References

1	Hurley DA, McDonough SM, Baxter GD, Dempster M and Moore AP: A descriptive study of the usage of spinal manipulative therapy techniques within a randomized clinical trial in acute low back pain. Man Ther. 10:61–67. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
2	Henderson CN: The basis for spinal manipulation: Chiropractic perspective of indicationsand theory. J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 22:632–642. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
3	Liu Q, Wang F and Zhang J: A biomechanical progress of facet joints in loads. J Trad Chin Orthop Trauma. 28:72–75. 2016.(In Chinese).
4	Wei XN, Wang Y and Pei F: A biomechanical progress of lumbar intervertebral disk in terms of structural features, internal pressure and different loads. Zhongguo Zuzhi Gongcheng Yanjiu. 19:3242–3247. 2015.
5	Zhang J, Wang F, Liu Q, Zhang H, Sun PD, Liang DZ and Zhao P: Conduction characteristics of human lumbar facet joint pressures during simulated spinal manipulation versus spinal mobilization. Zhongguo Zuzhi Gongcheng Yanjiu. 20:2546–2554. 2016.
6	Guo W, Gong C, Han L, et al: The curative effect analysis and mechanics measurement of the thrusting manipulation and mobilization. Med J Air Force. 31:226–229. 2009.
7	Xu HT, Xu DC, Li YG, Zhang MC, Li YK and Wang GL: Analyses of intra-stress and displacement of degenerate lumbar disc during simulating rotatory manipulaiton by finite element. Chin J Rehabil Med. 22:769–771. 2007.(In Chinese).
8	Xu HT, Li S, Liu L, Lai QL, Luo XW, Xu DC and Li YK: Finite element analysis of the intervertebral disc during lumbar obligue-pulling manipulation. Chin J Clin Rehabil Tissue Eng Res. 15:2335–2338. 2011.
9	Avramov AI, Cavanaugh JM, Ozaktay CA, Getchell TV and King AI: The effects of controlled mechanical loading on group-II, III and IV afferent units from the lumbar facet joint and surrounding tissue: An in vitro study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 74:1464–1471. 1992. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
10	Herzog W: The biomechanics of spinal manipulation. J Bodyw Mov Ther. 14:280–286. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
11	Downie AS, Vemulpad S and Bull PW: Quantifying the high-velocity, low-amplitude spinal manipulative thrust: A systematic review. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 33:542–553. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
12	Triano J and Schultz AB: Loads transmitted during lumbosacralspinal manipulative therapy. Spine. 22:1955–1964. 1997. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
13	Van Zoest GG and Gosselin G: Three-dimensionality of direct contact forces in chiropractic spinal manipulative therapy. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 26:549–556. 2003. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
14	Herzog W, Conway PJ, Kawchuk GN, Zhang Y and Hasler EM: Forces exerted during spinal manipulative therapy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 18:1206–1212. 1993. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
15	Guo W: The clinical curative effect analysis and biomechanical study of lumbar joint manipulation. Chin Acad Trad Chin Med. 153:2014.(In Chinese).
16	Liu Q: Simulation of pulling effect on lumbar intradiscal pressure under cyclic loading. Chin Acad Trad Chin Med. 57–63. 2013.(In Chinese).
17	Maigne JY and Guillon F: Highlighting of intervertebral movements and variations of intradiskal pressure during lumbar spine manipulation: A feasibility study. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 23:531–535. 2000. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
18	Xu HT, Zhang MC, Li YK, Wang GL and Qiu GC: Real-time measure of displacement and intra-stress of normal lumbar disc during simulating rotatory manipulation in sitting position. Chin J Rehabil Med. 20:563–565. 2005.(In Chinese).
19	Feng Y, Gao Y, Zhang GR, Jia GX and Wang SQ: Experimental study on correlation between vertebral displacement and pressure change of intervertebral disc. China J Orthop Trauma. 14:83–84. 2001.(In Chinese).
20	Adams MA and Roughley PJ: What is intervertebral disc degeneration and what causes it? Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 31:2151–2161. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
21	Feng Y, Gao Y, Yang WD and Feng TY: Reduction in nerve root compression by the nucleus pulposus after Feng's Spinal Manipulation. Neural Regen Res. 8:1139–1145. 2013.PubMed/NCBI