Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Modified Refixation Technique of Distal Deep and Superficial Medial Collateral Ligament Injuries.

Arthroscopy techniques·2026
Same author

How does the level of care change after proximal humeral fracture in older patients? A propensity score matching analysis.

European geriatric medicine·2026
Same author

Lateral Extra-articular Tenodesis Provides Superior Stability in ACL Reconstruction With Posterolateral Tibial Fracture.

The American journal of sports medicine·2026
Same author

The importance of comprehensive geriatric assessment in predicting the outcome of patients with proximal humerus fractures.

Aging clinical and experimental research·2026
Same author

Geriatric-Typical Characteristic Complexes Predict Short-Term Outcome of Proximal Humeral Fractures in Geriatric Patients.

Clinical interventions in aging·2026
Same author

The impact of prior level of care on the course of proximal humeral fractures in older patients: an analysis based on health insurance claims data.

BMC health services research·2026

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jun 13, 2026

Calibrated Forceps Model of Spinal Cord Compression Injury
09:41

Calibrated Forceps Model of Spinal Cord Compression Injury

Published on: April 24, 2015

Comparative Evaluation of Compression Testing Methods for Murine Lumbar Vertebral Bodies: Identifying Most Reliable

Daniel Kronenberg1, Britta Wieskoetter2, Sarah Soeger1

  • 1Department of Regenerative Musculoskeletal Medicine, Institute of Musculoskeletal Medicine, University of Muenster, 48149 Muenster, Germany.

Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)
|March 28, 2025
PubMed
Summary

Method 1, compressing the complete murine lumbar vertebral body (LVB) with dorsal spinal processes, offers the most reliable and reproducible results for assessing vertebral biomechanics. This method is recommended for future studies due to its consistency.

Keywords:
compression assaylumbar vertebramethod comparisonmouse model

More Related Videos

Semiautomated Longitudinal Microcomputed Tomography-based Quantitative Structural Analysis of a Nude Rat Osteoporosis-related Vertebral Fracture Model
07:12

Semiautomated Longitudinal Microcomputed Tomography-based Quantitative Structural Analysis of a Nude Rat Osteoporosis-related Vertebral Fracture Model

Published on: September 28, 2017

Mouse Lumbar Vertebra Uniaxial Compression Testing with Embedding of the Loading Surface
07:52

Mouse Lumbar Vertebra Uniaxial Compression Testing with Embedding of the Loading Surface

Published on: December 1, 2023

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jun 13, 2026

Calibrated Forceps Model of Spinal Cord Compression Injury
09:41

Calibrated Forceps Model of Spinal Cord Compression Injury

Published on: April 24, 2015

Semiautomated Longitudinal Microcomputed Tomography-based Quantitative Structural Analysis of a Nude Rat Osteoporosis-related Vertebral Fracture Model
07:12

Semiautomated Longitudinal Microcomputed Tomography-based Quantitative Structural Analysis of a Nude Rat Osteoporosis-related Vertebral Fracture Model

Published on: September 28, 2017

Mouse Lumbar Vertebra Uniaxial Compression Testing with Embedding of the Loading Surface
07:52

Mouse Lumbar Vertebra Uniaxial Compression Testing with Embedding of the Loading Surface

Published on: December 1, 2023

Area of Science:

  • Biomechanics
  • Orthopedics
  • Vertebral Mechanics

Background:

  • Assessing the mechanical properties of murine lumbar vertebral bodies (LVBs) is crucial for understanding spinal health and disease.
  • Standardized and reproducible methods are needed for accurate biomechanical testing of vertebrae.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate and compare four distinct compression testing methods for murine LVBs.
  • To identify the most reliable and reproducible technique for assessing vertebral compression strength.

Main Methods:

  • Four groups of female C57BL/6 mice underwent different compression testing protocols on their lumbar vertebral bodies.
  • Testing involved a mono-axial static testing machine measuring load to failure, stiffness, yield load, and elasticity modulus.

Main Results:

  • Method 1 (complete LVB with dorsal spinal processes) demonstrated significantly higher load-to-failure and yield-to-failure with the least variation.
  • Method 3 showed increased stiffness and Young's modulus but yielded inconsistent results.
  • Method 4 exhibited the greatest variability; Method 2 provided suitable data with slightly higher variation.

Conclusions:

  • Method 1 is the most consistent and reproducible technique for evaluating murine vertebral biomechanics.
  • Method 2 is recommended when spinal processes must be excluded from measurements.