Literature DB >> 24332617

Effect of glutaraldehyde fixation on the frictional response of immature bovine articular cartilage explants.

Sevan R Oungoulian1, Kristin E Hehir1, Kaicen Zhu1, Callen E Willis1, Anca G Marinescu1, Natasha Merali1, Christopher S Ahmad2, Clark T Hung3, Gerard A Ateshian4.   

Abstract

This study examined functional properties and biocompatibility of glutaraldehyde-fixed bovine articular cartilage over several weeks of incubation at body temperature to investigate its potential use as a resurfacing material in joint arthroplasty. In the first experiment, treated cartilage disks were fixed using 0.02, 0.20 and 0.60% glutaraldehyde for 24h then incubated, along with an untreated control group, in saline for up to 28d at 37°C. Both the equilibrium compressive and tensile moduli increased nearly twofold in treated samples compared to day 0 control, and remained at that level from day 1 to 28; the equilibrium friction coefficient against glass rose nearly twofold immediately after fixation (day 1) but returned to control values after day 7. Live explants co-cultured with fixed explants showed no quantitative difference in cell viability over 28d. In general, no significant differences were observed between 0.20 and 0.60% groups, so 0.20% was deemed sufficient for complete fixation. In the second experiment, cartilage-on-cartilage frictional measurements were performed under a migrating contact configuration. In the treated group, one explant was fixed using 0.20% glutaraldehyde while the apposing explant was left untreated; in the control group both explants were left untreated. From day 1 to 28, the treated group exhibited either no significant difference or slightly lower friction coefficient than the untreated group. These results suggest that a properly titrated glutaraldehyde treatment can reproduce the desired functional properties of native articular cartilage and maintain these properties for at least 28d at body temperature.
© 2013 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cartilage; Damage; Friction; Osteoarthritis; Wear

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24332617      PMCID: PMC3913559          DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2013.11.043

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Biomech        ISSN: 0021-9290            Impact factor:   2.712


  62 in total

Review 1.  Porcine aortic valve bioprostheses: morphologic and functional considerations.

Authors:  S L Hilbert; V J Ferrans
Journal:  J Long Term Eff Med Implants       Date:  1992

2.  Analysis of the Medtronic Intact bioprosthetic valve. Effects of "zero-pressure" fixation.

Authors:  I Vesely
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  1991-01       Impact factor: 5.209

3.  Survival of irradiated glutaraldehyde preserved bovine cartilage in nasal reconstruction: a retrospective study.

Authors:  L Kangesu; T E Goodacre; P R Stanley
Journal:  Br J Plast Surg       Date:  1991-10

4.  Effects of fixation back pressure and antimineralization treatment on the morphology of porcine aortic bioprosthetic valves.

Authors:  M A Flomenbaum; F J Schoen
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  1993-01       Impact factor: 5.209

5.  Long-term results of aortic valve replacement with nonviable homografts.

Authors:  R C Daly; T A Orszulak; H V Schaff; E McGovern; R B Wallace
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  1991-11       Impact factor: 29.690

6.  Glutaraldehyde-cross-linked meniscal allografts: mechanical properties.

Authors:  P J Wisnewski; D L Powers; J M Kennedy
Journal:  J Invest Surg       Date:  1988       Impact factor: 2.533

7.  An asymptotic solution for the contact of two biphasic cartilage layers.

Authors:  G A Ateshian; W M Lai; W B Zhu; V C Mow
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  1994-11       Impact factor: 2.712

8.  Osteochondral autologous graft transfer system in the knee; mid-term results.

Authors:  Mehmet Erdil; Kerem Bilsel; Omer Faruk Taser; Cengiz Sen; Mehmet Asik
Journal:  Knee       Date:  2012-07-15       Impact factor: 2.199

Review 9.  Cardiac valve prostheses: pathological and bioengineering considerations.

Authors:  F J Schoen
Journal:  J Card Surg       Date:  1987-03       Impact factor: 1.620

10.  Repair of cartilage lesions using biological implants. A comparative histological and biomechanical study in goats.

Authors:  B F Shahgaldi; A A Amis; F W Heatley; J McDowell; G Bentley
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  1991-01
View more
  10 in total

1.  Genipin crosslinking of cartilage enhances resistance to biochemical degradation and mechanical wear.

Authors:  Megan E McGann; Craig M Bonitsky; Mariah L Jackson; Timothy C Ovaert; Stephen B Trippel; Diane R Wagner
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  2015-05-18       Impact factor: 3.494

Review 2.  Active agents, biomaterials, and technologies to improve biolubrication and strengthen soft tissues.

Authors:  Benjamin G Cooper; Ara Nazarian; Brian D Snyder; Mark W Grinstaff
Journal:  Biomaterials       Date:  2018-07-26       Impact factor: 12.479

3.  Resurfacing damaged articular cartilage to restore compressive properties.

Authors:  Stephanie Grenier; Patrick E Donnelly; Jamila Gittens; Peter A Torzilli
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2014-11-05       Impact factor: 2.712

4.  A Finite Element Algorithm for Large Deformation Biphasic Frictional Contact Between Porous-Permeable Hydrated Soft Tissues.

Authors:  Brandon K Zimmerman; Steve A Maas; Jeffrey A Weiss; Gerard A Ateshian
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  2022-02-01       Impact factor: 2.097

5.  Effects of polycationic drug carriers on the electromechanical and swelling properties of cartilage.

Authors:  Matthew R Warren; Armin Vedadghavami; Sanjana Bhagavatula; Ambika G Bajpayee
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2022-06-27       Impact factor: 3.699

6.  Attachment of cartilage wear particles to the synovium negatively impacts friction properties.

Authors:  Eben G Estell; Lance A Murphy; Lianna R Gangi; Roshan P Shah; Gerard A Ateshian; Clark T Hung
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2021-08-04       Impact factor: 2.789

7.  A Photochemical Crosslinking Approach to Enhance Resistance to Mechanical Wear and Biochemical Degradation of Articular Cartilage.

Authors:  Hessam Noori-Dokht; Amin Joukar; Sonali Karnik; Taylor Williams; Stephen B Trippel; Diane R Wagner
Journal:  Cartilage       Date:  2022 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 3.117

8.  Comparison of natural crosslinking agents for the stabilization of xenogenic articular cartilage.

Authors:  Amanda Pinheiro; Avery Cooley; Jun Liao; Rajkumar Prabhu; Steven Elder
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  2015-12-18       Impact factor: 3.494

9.  Suitability of EGCG as a Means of Stabilizing a Porcine Osteochondral Xenograft.

Authors:  Steven Elder; John Clune; Jaylyn Walker; Paul Gloth
Journal:  J Funct Biomater       Date:  2017-09-23

10.  Efficacy and safety of equine cartilage for rhinoplasty: a multicenter double-blind non-inferiority randomized confirmatory clinical trial.

Authors:  Yongjoon Chang; Hyunjong Yun; Jong Woo Choi; Joong Min Suh; Woo Shik Jeong; Hojin Park; Min Kyu Kang; Yongho Shin; Kuylhee Kim; Chul Hoon Chung
Journal:  Arch Craniofac Surg       Date:  2022-08-20
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.