Literature DB >> 31288616

A Systematic Review and Guide to Mechanical Testing for Articular Cartilage Tissue Engineering.

Jay M Patel1,2, Brian C Wise1,3, Edward D Bonnevie1,2, Robert L Mauck1,2,3.   

Abstract

Articular cartilage is integral to the mechanical function of many joints in the body. When injured, cartilage lacks the capacity to self-heal, and thus, therapies and replacements have been developed in recent decades to treat damaged cartilage. Given that the primary function of articular cartilage is mechanical in nature, rigorous physical evaluation of cartilage tissues undergoing treatment and cartilage constructs intended for replacement is an absolute necessity. With the large number of groups developing cartilage tissue engineering strategies, however, a variety of mechanical testing protocols have been reported in the literature. This lack of consensus in testing methods makes comparison between studies difficult at times, and can lead to misinterpretation of data relative to native tissue. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to systematically review mechanical testing of articular cartilage and cartilage repair constructs over the past 10 years (January 2009-December 2018), to highlight the most common testing configurations, and to identify key testing parameters. For the most common tests, key parameters identified in this systematic review were validated by characterizing both cartilage tissue and hydrogels commonly used in cartilage tissue engineering. Our findings show that compression testing was the most common test performed (80.2%; 158/197), followed by evaluation of frictional properties (18.8%; 37/197). Upon further review of those studies performing compression testing, the various modes (ramp, stress relaxation, creep, dynamic) and testing configurations (unconfined, confined, in situ) are described and systematically reviewed for parameters, including strain rate, equilibrium time, and maximum strain. This systematic analysis revealed considerable variability in testing methods. Our validation testing studies showed that such variations in testing criteria could have large implications on reported outcome parameters (e.g., modulus) and the interpretation of findings from these studies. This analysis is carried out for all common testing methods, followed by a discussion of less common trends and directions in the mechanical evaluation of cartilage tissues and constructs. Overall, this work may serve as a guide for cartilage tissue engineers seeking to rigorously evaluate the physical properties of their novel treatment strategies. Impact Statement Articular cartilage tissue engineering has made significant strides with regard to treatments and replacements for injured tissue. The evaluation of these approaches typically involves mechanical testing, yet the plethora of testing techniques makes comparisons between studies difficult, and often leads to misinterpretation of data compared with native tissue. This study serves as a guide for the mechanical testing of cartilage tissues and constructs, highlighting recent trends in test conditions and validating these common procedures. Cartilage tissue engineers, especially those unfamiliar with mechanical testing protocols, will benefit from this study in their quest to physically evaluate novel treatment and regeneration approaches.

Entities:  

Keywords:  biomechanics; cartilage; compression; mechanical testing; systematic review

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31288616      PMCID: PMC6791482          DOI: 10.1089/ten.TEC.2019.0116

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Tissue Eng Part C Methods        ISSN: 1937-3384            Impact factor:   3.056


  100 in total

1.  Fluid load support during localized indentation of cartilage with a spherical probe.

Authors:  E D Bonnevie; V J Baro; L Wang; D L Burris
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2012-01-28       Impact factor: 2.712

2.  Strain-rate-dependent non-linear tensile properties of the superficial zone of articular cartilage.

Authors:  Sahand Ahsanizadeh; LePing Li
Journal:  Connect Tissue Res       Date:  2015-08-20       Impact factor: 3.417

3.  Enhancing integration of articular cartilage grafts via photochemical bonding.

Authors:  Alberto L Arvayo; Ivan J Wong; Jason L Dragoo; Marc E Levenston
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  2018-04-25       Impact factor: 3.494

4.  Mechanical characterization of matrix-induced autologous chondrocyte implantation (MACI®) grafts in an equine model at 53 weeks.

Authors:  Darvin J Griffin; Edward D Bonnevie; Devin J Lachowsky; James C A Hart; Holly D Sparks; Nance Moran; Gloria Matthews; Alan J Nixon; Itai Cohen; Lawrence J Bonassar
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2015-04-15       Impact factor: 2.712

5.  In vivo cartilage strain increases following medial meniscal tear and correlates with synovial fluid matrix metalloproteinase activity.

Authors:  Teralyn E Carter; Kevin A Taylor; Charles E Spritzer; Gangadhar M Utturkar; Dean C Taylor; Claude T Moorman; William E Garrett; Farshid Guilak; Amy L McNulty; Louis E DeFrate
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2015-03-05       Impact factor: 2.712

6.  Streaming potentials during the confined compression creep test of normal and proteoglycan-depleted cartilage.

Authors:  A C Chen; T T Nguyen; R L Sah
Journal:  Ann Biomed Eng       Date:  1997 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 3.934

7.  Mechanical properties of bovine articular cartilage under microscale indentation loading from atomic force microscopy.

Authors:  S Park; K D Costa; G A Ateshian; K-S Hong
Journal:  Proc Inst Mech Eng H       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 1.617

8.  Dynamic behavior of a biphasic cartilage model under cyclic compressive loading.

Authors:  J K Suh; Z Li; S L Woo
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  1995-04       Impact factor: 2.712

9.  Compression-rate-dependent nonlinear mechanics of normal and impaired porcine knee joints.

Authors:  Marcel Leonardo Rodriguez; LePing Li
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2017-11-14       Impact factor: 2.362

10.  Elastoviscous Transitions of Articular Cartilage Reveal a Mechanism of Synergy between Lubricin and Hyaluronic Acid.

Authors:  Edward D Bonnevie; Devis Galesso; Cynthia Secchieri; Itai Cohen; Lawrence J Bonassar
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-11-24       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  17 in total

Review 1.  Measurement of Three-Dimensional Internal Dynamic Strains in the Intervertebral Disc of the Lumbar Spine With Mechanical Loading and Golden-Angle Radial Sparse Parallel-Magnetic Resonance Imaging.

Authors:  Rajiv G Menon; Marcelo V W Zibetti; Martin Pendola; Ravinder R Regatte
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2021-03-13       Impact factor: 4.813

2.  Vibrometry as a noncontact alternative to dynamic and viscoelastic mechanical testing in cartilage.

Authors:  M Gabriela Espinosa; Gaston A Otarola; Jerry C Hu; Kyriacos A Athanasiou
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2021-12-22       Impact factor: 4.118

Review 3.  Systematic review on the application of 3D-bioprinting technology in orthoregeneration: current achievements and open challenges.

Authors:  Rachel L Pan; Kari Martyniak; Makan Karimzadeh; David G Gelikman; Jonathan DeVries; Kelly Sutter; Melanie Coathup; Mehdi Razavi; Rajendra Sawh-Martinez; Thomas J Kean
Journal:  J Exp Orthop       Date:  2022-09-19

4.  Resorbable Pins to Enhance Scaffold Retention in a Porcine Chondral Defect Model.

Authors:  Jay M Patel; Mackenzie L Sennett; Anthony R Martin; Kamiel S Saleh; Michael R Eby; Blair S Ashley; Liane M Miller; George R Dodge; Jason A Burdick; James L Carey; Robert L Mauck
Journal:  Cartilage       Date:  2020-10-09       Impact factor: 3.117

Review 5.  Biochemical Aspects of Scaffolds for Cartilage Tissue Engineering; from Basic Science to Regenerative Medicine.

Authors:  Davood Yari; Mohammad H Ebrahimzadeh; Jebrail Movaffagh; Azadeh Shahroodi; Moein Shirzad; Durdi Qujeq; Ali Moradi
Journal:  Arch Bone Jt Surg       Date:  2022-03

6.  Cartilage Assessment Requires a Surface Characterization Protocol: Roughness, Friction, and Function.

Authors:  M Gabriela Espinosa; Gaston A Otarola; Jerry C Hu; Kyriacos A Athanasiou
Journal:  Tissue Eng Part C Methods       Date:  2021-04       Impact factor: 3.056

Review 7.  Knee orthopedics as a template for the temporomandibular joint.

Authors:  Benjamin J Bielajew; Ryan P Donahue; M Gabriela Espinosa; Boaz Arzi; Dean Wang; David C Hatcher; Nikolaos K Paschos; Mark E K Wong; Jerry C Hu; Kyriacos A Athanasiou
Journal:  Cell Rep Med       Date:  2021-04-14

8.  An in vitro investigation to understand the synergistic role of MMPs-1 and 9 on articular cartilage biomechanical properties.

Authors:  Allison Mixon; Andrew Savage; Ahmed Suparno Bahar-Moni; Malek Adouni; Tanvir Faisal
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-07-13       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  A Tribological Comparison of Facet Joint, Sacroiliac Joint, and Knee Cartilage in the Yucatan Minipig.

Authors:  Rachel C Nordberg; M Gabriela Espinosa; Jerry C Hu; Kyriacos A Athanasiou
Journal:  Cartilage       Date:  2021-06-09       Impact factor: 3.117

Review 10.  Material-Assisted Strategies for Osteochondral Defect Repair.

Authors:  Constance Lesage; Marianne Lafont; Pierre Guihard; Pierre Weiss; Jérôme Guicheux; Vianney Delplace
Journal:  Adv Sci (Weinh)       Date:  2022-03-24       Impact factor: 17.521

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.