Literature DB >> 31466714

Functionally distinct tendons have different biomechanical, biochemical and histological responses to in vitro unloading.

Rachel K Choi1, Margaret M Smith2, Susan Smith2, Christopher B Little2, Elizabeth C Clarke3.   

Abstract

Tendons with different in vivo functions are known to have different baseline biomechanics, biochemistry and ultrastructure, and these can be affected by changes in loading. However it is not know whether different tendon types respond in the same, or different ways, to changes in loading. This study performed in vitro un-loading (stress deprivation) in culture on ovine medial extensor tendons (MET, a positional tendon), and superficial and deep digital flexor tendons (SDFTs and DDFTs, with energy-storing and intermediate functions respectively), for 21 days (n = 14 each). Tensile strength and elastic modulus were then measured, followed by biochemical assays for sulphated glycosaminoglycan (sGAG) and hydroxyproline content. Histological inspection for cell morphology, cell density and collagen alignment was also performed. The positional tendon (MET) had a significant reduction (∼50%) in modulus and strength (P < 0.001) after in vitro stress-deprivation, however there were no significant effects on the energy-storing tendons (SDFT and DDFT). In contrast, sGAG was not affected in the MET, but was reduced in the SDFT and DDFT (P < 0.001). All tendons lost compactness and collagen organisation, and had reduced cell density, but these were more rapid in the MET than the SDFT and DDFT. These results suggest that different tendon types respond to identical stimuli in different ways, thus; (i) the results from an experiment in one tendon type may not be as applicable to other tendon types as previously thought, (ii) positional tendons may be particularly vulnerable to clinical stress-deprivation, and (iii) graft tendon source may affect the biological response to loading in ligament and tendon reconstruction.
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Composition; Extensor tendon; Flexor tendon; Functionally distinct; Ultrastructure

Year:  2019        PMID: 31466714     DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2019.109321

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


  4 in total

Review 1.  Tendon Extracellular Matrix Assembly, Maintenance and Dysregulation Throughout Life.

Authors:  Seyed Mohammad Siadat; Danae E Zamboulis; Chavaunne T Thorpe; Jeffrey W Ruberti; Brianne K Connizzo
Journal:  Adv Exp Med Biol       Date:  2021       Impact factor: 2.622

2.  Enthesis strength, toughness and stiffness: an image-based model comparing tendon insertions with varying bony attachment geometries.

Authors:  Mikhail Golman; Victor Birman; Stavros Thomopoulos; Guy M Genin
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2021-12-22       Impact factor: 4.293

3.  ISSLS PRIZE IN BASIC SCIENCE 2020: Beyond microstructure-circumferential specialization within the lumbar intervertebral disc annulus extends to collagen nanostructure, with counterintuitive relationships to macroscale material properties.

Authors:  Tyler W Herod; Samuel P Veres
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2019-11-25       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  Postnatal mechanical loading drives adaptation of tissues primarily through modulation of the non-collagenous matrix.

Authors:  Hazel Rc Screen; Peter D Clegg; Danae E Zamboulis; Chavaunne T Thorpe; Yalda Ashraf Kharaz; Helen L Birch
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2020-10-16       Impact factor: 8.140

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.