| Literature DB >> 27897156 |
Mikko S Venäläinen1,2, Mika E Mononen1, Jari Salo3,4, Lasse P Räsänen1, Jukka S Jurvelin1,5, Juha Töyräs1,5, Tuomas Virén2, Rami K Korhonen1,5.
Abstract
Focal cartilage lesions can proceed to severe osteoarthritis or remain unaltered even for years. A method to identify high risk defects would be of utmost importance to guide clinical decision making and to identify the patients that are at the highest risk for the onset and progression of osteoarthritis. Based on cone beam computed tomography arthrography, we present a novel computational model for evaluating changes in local mechanical responses around cartilage defects. Our model, based on data obtained from a human knee in vivo, demonstrated that the most substantial alterations around the defect, as compared to the intact tissue, were observed in minimum principal (compressive) strains and shear strains. Both strain values experienced up to 3-fold increase, exceeding levels previously associated with chondrocyte apoptosis and failure of collagen crosslinks. Furthermore, defects at the central regions of medial tibial cartilage with direct cartilage-cartilage contact were the most vulnerable to loading. Also locations under the meniscus experienced substantially increased minimum principal strains. We suggest that during knee joint loading particularly minimum principal and shear strains are increased above tissue failure limits around cartilage defects which might lead to osteoarthritis. However, this increase in strains is highly location-specific on the joint surface.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27897156 PMCID: PMC5126640 DOI: 10.1038/srep37538
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1(a) Protocol for imaging and image processing. Prior to imaging, 20 ml of anionic ioxaglate was injected into the knee joint and five HA phantoms were placed around the knee. (b) After redistribution of contrast agent, the knee joint was imaged using a modern peripheral CBCT scanner. (c) A sagittal section of the knee showing contrast agent (bright area) and segmented tissue boundaries. (d) Close-up image of the segmented defect including a representation of the healthy tissue created by manually interpolating the intact tissue surface over the defect. (e) Assembly of solid geometries based on segmented tissues.
Figure 2(a) FE representation of the knee with (b) fully intact and damaged tibial cartilage. (c) In order to improve the accuracy of the results, submodels of a 12 × 12 mm2 region of interest around the defect were created for both models.
Figure 3(a) Collagen architecture implemented for cartilage. (b) Inhomogeneous elastic properties of bone estimated from CBCT with the aid of HA phantoms. (c) FE model assembly showing the implementation of kinematic input (see30 for full description). (d) Original and alternative defect locations.
Figure 4(a) Cartilage-cartilage contact patterns at different phases of stance. (b) Corresponding maximum contact pressures and experimental contact values from the literature52 as a function of stance phase.
Figure 5Axial and lateral logarithmic and engineering shear strains evaluated at 85% of the stance phase of gait (second peak load) for intact and damaged articular cartilage.
Figure 6Local differences in (a) maximum principal stresses, (b) fibril strains, (c) maximum principal logarithmic strains, (d) minimum principal strains and (e) engineering shear strains at 85% of the stance phase of gait, the location of maximum differences between models with intact and damaged cartilage (middle) and the evolution of maximum values as a function of stance (right). The limits for potential tissue failure are indicated in graphs with dashed lines.
Figure 7Maximum values of minimum principal and shear strains within 1 mm radius of the defect (here approximately the size of the defect location indicator) at different locations within medial tibial cartilage.