Tweet
The Hueter-Volkmann principle is the cause (not the only one for me) of the scoliosis vicious cycle, because more pressure on growing bone of the concave side provokes less growth than in the convex side (without great pressure), so an increment of the curve would be the outcome, leading to more pressure on the concave side.. I suppose this principle has nothing to do with adults.
But not the Wolff's law “Bone is rebuilt more if there are stresses on the bone, less if there are not. (1892”) wich is more complex and I don’t know if is something opposite. Maybe someone here with enough Biology (Osteology?) knowledge may explain me this.
It seems that ‘rebuilt’ includes changes in geometry shape. It seems that may be (in opposite to H-V principle) something good.
I don’t know if this may be true and why: ‘The continual asymmetrical loading of the vertebrae leads to permanent bone deformity via the Hueter-Volkmann principle and Wolff's law.’ http://www.squidoo.com/scoliosis-brace
Why the Wolff's law provokes a permanente deforming? Because less pressure in convex side will turn it weaker? But the conflictive side is the concave side, which would be rebuilt because a higher pressure, not deformed. Probably this law works in all the bone, not only in differents parts as the H-V law, but anyway why should to provokes a deformity? Because an unequal pressure avoid a rebuilt? Or leads to a bad rebuilding? I don’t understand.
‘For centuries, the scientific equipment did not exist to prove that bone remodeling applied to adults as well as children. As a result, the medical community inappropriately applied the physics of the law to children only, as it was believed that bone modeling stopped when a person reached skeletal maturation. However, since 1990, medical evidence has shown that Wolff’s law extends to adults as well. (ref. 4) So, while the medical community has for years accepted bracing for children, the evidence for bracing to be accepted for adults is now clear -- the physiologic principles are the same.’ http://www.prcstudiocity.com/scoliosis.html
‘These results suggest that if appropriate loads can be applied to human vertebrae, scoliosis with vertebral wedging can be corrected without a spinal fusion in both adolescents and adults.’ http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC308...Sf7fxWA0MwTD.0
The first time I heard about this law some years ago, I imagined that scoliotic people with a flexible spine should to stay lying down with the soles on a wall and someone pushing the shoulders against the wall, so in this way, the aligned vertebras (because the absence of gravity force) would suffer a similar pressure as normal people standing up.
This idea of the use of braces tends to do the same.
“Remodeling is triggered not by principal stress, but by "flexure." And it seems that Wolff’s law has an umbral of flexure force and below it, none rebuilding is done.
So, what I want to know is if in scoliotic people, rebuilding not works because unpair forces in concave/convex sides or because flexure force is lesser (because gravity force descomposition), under the umbral. If the answer would be the first, I'm not sure if more pressure in the concave side not would turn it stronger. If it would be the last, braces would not be necessary for rebuilding, but just only more pressure (jumping, lifting weights..)
I hope someone here may help me with these doubts. To talk with physicians (surgeons, osteologists, rheumatologist..) about these issues is only a waste of time.
But not the Wolff's law “Bone is rebuilt more if there are stresses on the bone, less if there are not. (1892”) wich is more complex and I don’t know if is something opposite. Maybe someone here with enough Biology (Osteology?) knowledge may explain me this.
It seems that ‘rebuilt’ includes changes in geometry shape. It seems that may be (in opposite to H-V principle) something good.
I don’t know if this may be true and why: ‘The continual asymmetrical loading of the vertebrae leads to permanent bone deformity via the Hueter-Volkmann principle and Wolff's law.’ http://www.squidoo.com/scoliosis-brace
Why the Wolff's law provokes a permanente deforming? Because less pressure in convex side will turn it weaker? But the conflictive side is the concave side, which would be rebuilt because a higher pressure, not deformed. Probably this law works in all the bone, not only in differents parts as the H-V law, but anyway why should to provokes a deformity? Because an unequal pressure avoid a rebuilt? Or leads to a bad rebuilding? I don’t understand.
‘For centuries, the scientific equipment did not exist to prove that bone remodeling applied to adults as well as children. As a result, the medical community inappropriately applied the physics of the law to children only, as it was believed that bone modeling stopped when a person reached skeletal maturation. However, since 1990, medical evidence has shown that Wolff’s law extends to adults as well. (ref. 4) So, while the medical community has for years accepted bracing for children, the evidence for bracing to be accepted for adults is now clear -- the physiologic principles are the same.’ http://www.prcstudiocity.com/scoliosis.html
‘These results suggest that if appropriate loads can be applied to human vertebrae, scoliosis with vertebral wedging can be corrected without a spinal fusion in both adolescents and adults.’ http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC308...Sf7fxWA0MwTD.0
The first time I heard about this law some years ago, I imagined that scoliotic people with a flexible spine should to stay lying down with the soles on a wall and someone pushing the shoulders against the wall, so in this way, the aligned vertebras (because the absence of gravity force) would suffer a similar pressure as normal people standing up.
This idea of the use of braces tends to do the same.
“Remodeling is triggered not by principal stress, but by "flexure." And it seems that Wolff’s law has an umbral of flexure force and below it, none rebuilding is done.
So, what I want to know is if in scoliotic people, rebuilding not works because unpair forces in concave/convex sides or because flexure force is lesser (because gravity force descomposition), under the umbral. If the answer would be the first, I'm not sure if more pressure in the concave side not would turn it stronger. If it would be the last, braces would not be necessary for rebuilding, but just only more pressure (jumping, lifting weights..)
I hope someone here may help me with these doubts. To talk with physicians (surgeons, osteologists, rheumatologist..) about these issues is only a waste of time.
Comment