Use this URL to cite or link to this record in EThOS: https://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.802147
Title: Comparative radiological anatomy of human, porcine and ovine vertebrae
Author: Ariyanayagam, Timothy
ISNI:       0000 0004 8509 6282
Awarding Body: University of East Anglia
Current Institution: University of East Anglia
Date of Award: 2019
Availability of Full Text:
Access from EThOS:
Access from Institution:
Abstract:
Osteoporotic vertebral fractures represent an important health burden in the Western world, in particular given the aging population demographics of most Western countries. At present, the treatment options for osteoporotic vertebral fractures are limited, and often conservative, relying on medical pain management. Transpedicular spinal interventional techniques such as vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty offer a minimally invasive treatment option for osteoporotic vertebral fractures. However, there has been recent controversy regarding the efficacy of vertebroplasty for pain relief. Although these percutaneous techniques continue to be used and developed, there is no consensus on the pre-clinical testing of new instruments and cements. Human cadaveric vertebrae are expensive and of limited availability, and animal vertebrae offer a more easily accessible alternative, but there is no agreement within the literature as to which species best approximates the human. This thesis explores the currently available evidence comparing human and animal vertebrae, and performs comparison studies assessing basic morphometric measurements, bone texture, and statistical shape analysis, to decide upon the best animal model for the use in assessing novel transpedicular instruments and vertebral bone cements. The findings would also apply to developments in surgical transpedicular screws. The morphometry showed that sheep are generally closer to humans in the thoracic spine, whereas pigs are closer in the lumbar spine. Bone texture analysis demonstrated no significant differences in trabecular thickness between humans and either sheep or pigs. Statistical shape analysis corroborated the findings of basic morphometry. Taking the findings in combination, I would suggest that for the purposes of transpedicular techniques, the sheep is a closer model to the human in the thoracic spine, and the pig is closer in the lumbar spine.
Supervisor: Not available Sponsor: Not available
Qualification Name: Thesis (M.D.) Qualification Level: Doctoral
EThOS ID: uk.bl.ethos.802147  DOI: Not available
Share: