| Literature DB >> 32908171 |
Benjamin Fischer1,2, Sascha Kurz3,4, Andreas Höch4, Stefan Schleifenbaum3,4,5.
Abstract
In the run-up to biomechanical testing, fresh human tissue samples are often frozen in order to inhibit initial decomposition processes and to achieve a temporal independence of tissue acquisition from biomechanical testing. The aim of this study was to compare the mechanical properties of fresh tissue samples of the human iliotibial tract (IT) to fresh-frozen samples taken from the same IT and those modified with different concentrations of Dimethylsulfoxide (DMSO) prior to freezing. All samples were partial plastinated and destructive tensile tests were conducted with a uniaxial tensile test setup. A plastination technique already established in the laboratory was modified to improve the clamping behaviour of the samples. Material failure was caused by a gradual rupture of the load-bearing collagen fibre bundles. Contrary to our expectations, no significant difference was found between the tensile strength of fresh and fresh frozen specimens. The addition of 1 wt% DMSO did not increase the tensile strength compared to fresh-frozen samples; an addition of 10 wt% DMSO even resulted in a decrease. Based on our findings, the use of simple fresh-frozen specimens to determine the tensile strength is viable; however fresh specimens should be used to generate a complete property profile.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32908171 PMCID: PMC7481782 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-71790-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Left: Harvested IT with extraction area of the four samples (black outline). The curvature is a result of the placement of the iliotibial tract; Right: Extracted samples prior to plastination.
Sample preparation of the four different sample states: Fresh (F), Fresh-deep-frozen (FDF0), Fresh-frozen with 1 wt% DMSO (FDF1) and Fresh-frozen with 10 wt% DMSO (FDF10).
| Type | Abbreviation | Sample preparation |
|---|---|---|
| I | F | Fresh sample |
| II | FDF0 | Storage in PSS (20 min) before freezing |
| III | FDF1 | Storage in PSS with 1 wt% DMSO (20 min) before freezing |
| IV | FDF10 | Storage in PSS with 10 wt% DMSO (20 min) before freezing |
Figure 2Scheme of sample preparation.
Figure 3Dimensions of the beech wood panels used (5 × 25 × 30 (H × W × D) mm).
Figure 4Cross section through the plastinated clamping zone. A conclusive material bond between wood (A), resin-hydroxide mixture (B) and plane-parallel embedded iliotibial tract specimen can be recognized (C).
Figure 5Procedure for uniaxial tensile testing. Left: Under preload. Clearly visible at the edges left and right of the test area is the superficial tissue layer, which is not load bearing and masks the collagen fibre bundles, Mid: Immediately before failure, Right: After exceeding tensile strength and incipient failure of collagen fibre bundles at the bottom right area.
Determined average tensile strength (Ftu) and Young’s Modulus (E) for the sample states F, FDF0, FDF1 and FDF10.
| F | FDF0 | FDF1 | FDF10 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ftu (MPa) | 37.66 (SD 18.87) | 34.64 (SD 12.08) | 30.96 (SD 13.12) | 22.00 (SD 10.91) |
| E (MPa) | 0.73 (SD 0.44) | 0.91 (SD 0.29) | 0.83 (SD 0.28) | 0.65 (SD 0.28) |
Figure 6Stress–Strain-curves of different sample types: fresh (I), 0% DMSO (II), 1% DMSO (III) and 10% DMSO (IV).
Figure 7Mean tensile strength (MPa) and Mean Young’s Modulus (MPa).