1. Copyright © 2015 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized commercial reproduction of this slide is prohibited Supplemental PowerPoint Slides Does location of rotation center in artificial disc affect cervical biomechanics? Zhongjun Mo, PhD, *, Yanbin Zhao, MD, †, Chengfei Du, PhD, *, Yu Sun, MD, †, Ming Zhang, PhD3, ‡, Yubo Fan, PhD, * *Key Laboratory for Biomechanics and Mechanobiology of Ministry of Education, International Joint Research Center of Aerospace Biotechnology and Medical Engineering of Ministry of Science and Technology, School of Biological Science and Medical Engineering, Beihang University, Beijing, P.R.China †Orthopaedic Department of Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, P.R.China ‡Interdisciplinary Division of Biomedical Engineering, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong

2.  Stability : extremely affected in extension by TDRs.  Mobile RC : readjust cervical curvature under a low follower load.  BS configurations : exhibit similar performances in terms of the cervical stability in flexion.  BS-FS : be good at motion control during extension. Cervical stability and spinal motion

3. BS-FI BS-FS BS-MI DA-M SA-V Healthy Max: 1.2MPa Max: 2.0MPa Max: 2.3MPa Max: 2.8MPa Max: 1.8MPa Max: 1.0MPa Max: 1.1MPa Max: 0.7MPa Max: 1.5MPa Max: 3.8MPa Max: 2.4MPa Stress distribution A) Facet joint (C5)B) Bone-implant interface (C6)  BS designs exhibited higher facet joint stress but lower stress on the bone-implant interface.  Sliding articulation exhibited better in relieving facet joint stress.  Dual articulation exhibited the highest stress on the bone-implant interface.