Abstract
This review challenges an earlier view that the intervertebral joint could not be classified as a diarthrodial joint and should remain as an amphiarthrosis. However, a careful analysis of the relevant literature and in light of more recent studies, it is clear that while some differences exist between the spinal articulation and the generic synovial joint, there are clear structural, functional and developmental similarities between the joints that in sum outweigh the differences. Further, since the intervertebral motion segment displays movement in three dimensions and the whole spine itself provides integrated rotatory movements, it is proposed that it should be classified not as an amphiarthrose, "a slightly moveable joint" but as a complex polyaxial joint. Hopefully, reclassification will encourage further analysis of the structure and function of the two types of overlapping joints and provide common new insights into diseases that afflict the many joints of the human skeleton.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 771-776 |
| Number of pages | 6 |
| Journal | Bone |
| Volume | 50 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Mar 1 2012 |
Fingerprint
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism
- Physiology
- Histology
Cite this
}
Is the spinal motion segment a diarthrodial polyaxial joint : What a nice nucleus like you doing in a joint like this? / Shapiro, Irving M.; Vresilovic, Edward; Risbud, Makarand V.
In: Bone, Vol. 50, No. 3, 01.03.2012, p. 771-776.Research output: Contribution to journal › Review article
TY - JOUR
T1 - Is the spinal motion segment a diarthrodial polyaxial joint
T2 - What a nice nucleus like you doing in a joint like this?
AU - Shapiro, Irving M.
AU - Vresilovic, Edward
AU - Risbud, Makarand V.
PY - 2012/3/1
Y1 - 2012/3/1
N2 - This review challenges an earlier view that the intervertebral joint could not be classified as a diarthrodial joint and should remain as an amphiarthrosis. However, a careful analysis of the relevant literature and in light of more recent studies, it is clear that while some differences exist between the spinal articulation and the generic synovial joint, there are clear structural, functional and developmental similarities between the joints that in sum outweigh the differences. Further, since the intervertebral motion segment displays movement in three dimensions and the whole spine itself provides integrated rotatory movements, it is proposed that it should be classified not as an amphiarthrose, "a slightly moveable joint" but as a complex polyaxial joint. Hopefully, reclassification will encourage further analysis of the structure and function of the two types of overlapping joints and provide common new insights into diseases that afflict the many joints of the human skeleton.
AB - This review challenges an earlier view that the intervertebral joint could not be classified as a diarthrodial joint and should remain as an amphiarthrosis. However, a careful analysis of the relevant literature and in light of more recent studies, it is clear that while some differences exist between the spinal articulation and the generic synovial joint, there are clear structural, functional and developmental similarities between the joints that in sum outweigh the differences. Further, since the intervertebral motion segment displays movement in three dimensions and the whole spine itself provides integrated rotatory movements, it is proposed that it should be classified not as an amphiarthrose, "a slightly moveable joint" but as a complex polyaxial joint. Hopefully, reclassification will encourage further analysis of the structure and function of the two types of overlapping joints and provide common new insights into diseases that afflict the many joints of the human skeleton.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84856949777&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84856949777&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.bone.2011.12.004
DO - 10.1016/j.bone.2011.12.004
M3 - Review article
C2 - 22197996
AN - SCOPUS:84856949777
VL - 50
SP - 771
EP - 776
JO - Bone
JF - Bone
SN - 8756-3282
IS - 3
ER -