The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Young Investigator Award Winner: Validation of the Mouse and Rat Disc as Mechanical Models of the Human Lumbar Disc
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: Measure the mechanical properties of the mouse and rat disc in compression and torsion. OBJECTIVES: Validate mouse and rat disc as a biomechanical model of the human disc by comparing the normalized properties in compression and torsion loading. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Rodents have been widely used as models to study disc degeneration; however, mechanical assessments of the rodent disc have been limited. Mouse and rat disc mechanical properties have not been determined. METHODS: Mechanically test mouse and rat motion segments from both the lumbar and the caudal levels in axial compression and torsion. Normalize the stiffness using disc geometry and compare with human motion segment stiffness taken from the literature. Compare lumbar and caudal levels with each other within each species, and test for correlation between mechanics and body weight. RESULTS: The average compression stiffness, normalized by geometry, was 2-4 MPa and compared well with human motion segment stiffness in compression (3-9 MPa). The average torsion stiffness, normalized by disc geometry, was 5-11 MPa and compared well with human motion segment stiffness in torsion (2-9 MPa). Differences between the lumbar and caudal levels were observed. For the caudal tail, no correlation between body weight and any compression property was observed, but for the lumbar spine, some correlations were observed. CONCLUSIONS.: This study provides validation for the mouse and rat disc as a mechanical model of the human disc. Correlations between lumbar spine properties and animal body weight provide support for the use of quadruped animal lumbar spines as mechanical models of the bipedal human spine. The differences between lumbar and tail mechanics need further exploration. These findings are important in light of the extensive use of the rodent in disc studies and the expected future utility of genetically engineered mice.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Are animal models useful for studying human disc disorders/degeneration?
Alini, M., Eisenstein, S. M., Ito, K., Little, C., Kettler, A. A., Masuda, K., Melrose, J., Ralphs, J., Stokes, I., & Wilke, H. J. (2008) · European Spine Journal · doi:10.1007/s00586-007-0414-y · Cited by 698
Comparison of Animals Used in Disc Research to Human Lumbar Disc Geometry
O’Connell, G. D., Vresilovic, E. J., & Elliott, D. M. (2007) · Spine · doi:10.1097/01.brs.0000253961.40910.c1 · Cited by 329
Self-citationTGF-β1-supplemented decellularized annulus fibrosus matrix hydrogels promote annulus fibrosus repair
Wei, Q., Liu, D., Chu, G., Yu, Q., Liu, Z., Li, J., Meng, Q., Wang, W., Han, F., & Li, B. (2023) · Bioactive Materials · doi:10.1016/j.bioactmat.2022.04.025 · Cited by 59
Metadata
- Authors
- Elliott, D. M., & Sarver, J. J.
- Venue
- Spine
- Published
- 2004-04
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 713-722
- ISSN
- 0362-2436 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2073731770
- Cited by
- 168
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 6.13
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Young Investigator Award Winner: Validation of the Mouse and Rat Disc as Mechanical Models of the Human Lumbar Disc. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/01.brs.0000116982.19331.ea
- The paper
- Elliott, D. M., & Sarver, J. J. (2004). Young Investigator Award Winner: Validation of the Mouse and Rat Disc as Mechanical Models of the Human Lumbar Disc. Spine. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.brs.0000116982.19331.ea
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.