and Introduction Abstract Study Design: Review and reinterpretation of existing literature. Objective: To suggest how intervertebral disc degeneration might be distinguished from the physiologic processes of growth, aging, healing, and adaptive remodeling. Summary of Background Data: The research literature concerning disc degeneration is particularly diverse, and there are no accepted definitions to guide biomedical research, or medicolegal practice. Definitions: The process of disc degeneration is an aberrant, cell-mediated response to progressive structural failure. A degenerate disc is one with structural failure combined with accelerated or advanced signs of aging. Early degenerative changes should refer to accelerated age-related changes in a structurally intact disc. Degenerative disc disease should be applied to a degenerate disc that is also painful. Justification: Structural defects such as endplate fracture, radial fissures, and herniation are easily detected, unambiguous markers of impaired disc function. They are not inevitable with age and are more closely related to pain than any other feature of aging discs. Structural failure is irreversible because adult discs have limited healing potential. It also progresses by physical and biologic mechanisms, and, therefore, is a suitable marker for a degenerative process. Biologic progression occurs because structural failure uncouples the local mechanical environment of disc cells from the overall loading of the disc, so that disc cell responses can be inappropriate or aberrant. Animal models confirm that cell-mediated changes always follow structural failure caused by trauma. This definition of disc degeneration simplifies the issue of causality: excessive mechanical loading disrupts a disc's structure and precipitates a cascade of cell-mediated responses, leading to further disruption. Underlying causes of disc degeneration include genetic inheritance, age, inadequate metabolite transport, and loading history, all of which can weaken discs to such an extent that structural failure occurs during the activities of daily living. The other closely related definitions help to distinguish between degenerate and injured discs, and between discs that are and are not painful.

What is intervertebral disc degeneration, and what causes it?

The intervertebral disc is a cartilaginous structure that resembles articular cartilage in its biochemistry, but morphologically it is clearly different. It shows degenerative and ageing changes earlier than does any other connective tissue in the body. It is believed to be important clinically because there is an association of disc degeneration with back pain. Current treatments are predominantly conservative or, less commonly, surgical; in many cases there is no clear diagnosis and therapy is considered inadequate. New developments, such as genetic and biological approaches, may allow better diagnosis and treatments in the future.

/pdf/degeneration-of-the-intervertebral-disc-297lygwdik.pdf

Degeneration of the intervertebral disc

volves gross structural disruption as well as cell-mediated changes in matrix composition, but there is little evidence concerning which comes first. Comparatively minor damage to a vertebral body is known to decompress the adjacent discs, and this may adversely affect both structure and cell function in the disc. Methods. In this study, 38 cadaveric lumbar motion segments (mean age, 51 years) were subjected to complex mechanical loading to simulate typical activities in vivo while the distribution of compressive stress in the disc matrix was measured using a pressure transducer mounted in a needle 1.3 mm in diameter. “Stress profiles” were repeated after a controlled compressive overload injury had reduced motion segment height by approximately 1%. Moderate repetitive loading, appropriate for the simulation of light manual labor, then was applied to the damaged specimens for approximately 4 hours, and stress profilometry was repeated a third time. Discs then were sectioned and photographed. Results. Endplate damage reduced pressure in the adjacent nucleus pulposus by 25% 6 27% and generated peaks of compressive stress in the anulus, usually posteriorly to the nucleus. Discs 50 to 70 years of age were affected the most. Repetitive loading further decompressed the nucleus and intensified stress concentrations in the anulus, especially in simulated lordotic postures. Sagittal plane sections of 15 of the discs showed an inwardly collapsing anulus in 9 discs, extreme outward bulging of the anulus in 11 discs, and complete radial fissures in 2 discs, 1 of which allowed posterior migration of nucleus pulposus. Comparisons with the results from tissue culture experiments indicated that the observed changes in matrix compressive stress would inhibit disc cell metabolism throughout the disc, and could lead to progressive deterioration of the matrix. Conclusions. Minor damage to a vertebral body end

Mechanical Initiation of Intervertebral Disc Degeneration

The biomechanics of low back injury: Implications on current practice in industry and the clinic

Study Design. An experimental approach was used to test human cadaveric spine specimens. Objective. To assess the response of the whole lumbar spine to a compressive follower load whose path approximates the tangent to the curve of the lumbar spine. of Background Data. Compression on the lumbar spine is 1000 N for standing and walking and is higher during lifting. Ex vivo experiments show it buckles at 80-100 N. Differences between maximum ex vivo and in vivo loads have not been satisfactorily explained. Methods. A new experimental technique was developed for applying a compressive follower load of physiologic magnitudes up to 1200 N. The experimental technique applied loads that minimized the internal shear forces and bending moments, made the resultant internal force compressive, and caused the load path to approximate the tangent to the curve of the lumbar spine. Results. A compressive vertical load applied in the neutral lordotic and forward-flexed postures caused large changes in lumbar lordosis at small load magnitudes. The specimen approached its extension or flexion limits at a vertical load of 100 N. in sharp contrast, the lumbar spine supported a load of up to 1200 N without damage or instability when the load path was tangent to the spinal curve. Conclusions. Until this study, an experimental technique for applying compressive loads of in vivo magnitudes to the whole lumbar spine was unavailable. The load-carrying capacity of the lumbar spine sharply increased under a compressive follower load, as long as the load path remained within a small range around the centers of rotation of the lumbar segments. The follower load path provides an explanation of how the whole lumbar spine can be lordotic and yet resist large compressive loads. This study may have impiications for determining the role of trunk muscles in stabilizing the lumbar spine.

M A Adams

Papers

Prolapsed intervertebral disc. A hyperflexion injury 1981 Volvo Award in Basic Science.