Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Temporal evolution of skeletal regenerated tissue: what can mechanical investigation add to biological?

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The objective here was to experimentally characterize the temporal evolution of the structural and mechanical properties of large volume immature regenerated tissues. We studied these evolving tissues from their genesis in controlled mechanical conditions. We developed an animal model based on the periosteal properties leading to unloaded regenerated skeletal tissue. To characterize the temporal evolution of mechanical properties, we carried out indentation tests coupled with macroscopic examinations and histological studies. This combined methodology yielded a range of information on osteogenesis at different scales: macroscopic by simple observation, mesoscopic by indentation test and microscopic by histological study. Results allowed us to identify different periods, providing a link between biological changes and material property evolution in bone tissue regeneration. The regenerated tissue evolves from a viscous, homogeneous, soft material to a heterogeneous stiffer material endowed with a lower viscosity. From a biological point of view, cell organization progresses from a proliferated cell clot to a mature structure closer to that of the bone. During the first 7 days, mechanical and biological results revealed the same evolution: first, the regenerated tissue grew, then, differentiated into an osteochondral tissue and finally calcification began. While our biological results confirm those of other studies, our mechanical results provide the first experimental mechanical characterization by reduced Young’s modulus of such tissue.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Buckwalter JA, Glimcher MJ, Cooper RR, Recker R (1995) Bone Biology. J Bone Joint Surg 77:1276–1289

    Google Scholar 

  2. Claes LE, Heigele CA (1999) Magnitudes of local stress and strain along bony surfaces predict the course and type of fracture healing. J Biomech 32:255–266

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Caplan AI (1994) The mesengenic process. Clin Plast Surg 21:429–435

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Carter DR, Blenman PR, Beaupre GS (1988) Correlations between mechanical stress history and tissue differentiation in initial fracture healing. J Orthop Res 6:736–748

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Carter DR, Beaupre GS, Giori NJ, Helms JA (1998) Mechanobiology of skeletal regeneration. Clin Orthopaed Relat Res 355S:S41–S55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Cullinane DM, Salisbury KT, Alkhiary Y, Eisenberg S, Gerstenfeld L, Einhorn TA (2003) Effects of the local mechanical environment on vertebrate tissue differentiation during repair: does repair recapitulate development? J Exp Biol 206:2459–2471

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Ferguson C, Alpern E, Miclau T, Helms JA (1999) Does adult fracture repair recapitulate embryonic skeletal formation? Mech Dev 87:57–66

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Heegaar JH, Beaupre GS, Carter D (1999) Mechanically modulated cartilage growth may regulate joint surface morphogenesis. J Orthop Res 17:509–517

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Huiskes R, Driel WD, Prendergast PJ, Soballe K (1997) A biomechanical regulatory model for periprosthetic fibrous-tissue differentiation. J Mater Sci Mater Med 8:785–788

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Isaksson H, Comas O, Van Donkelaar CC, Mediavilla J, Wilson W, Huiskes R, Itoa K (2007) Bone regeneration during distraction osteogenesis: Mechano-regulation by shear strain and fluid velocity. J Biomech 40:2002–2011

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Lacroix D, Prendergast PJ (2002) A mechano-regulation model for tissue differentiation during fracture healing: analysis of gap size and loading. J Biomech 35:1163–1171

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Lacroix D, Prendergast PJ, Li G, Marsh D (2002) Biomechanical model to simulate tissue differentiation and bone regeneration: application to fracture healing. Med Biol Eng Comput 40:14–21

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Lau A, Oyen ML, Kent RW, Murakami D, Torigaki T (2008) Indentation stiffness of aging human costal cartilage. Acta Biomater 4(1):97–103

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Loboa EG, Wren TA, Beaupre GS, Carter DR (2003) Mechanobiology of soft skeletal tissue differentiation—a computational approach of a fiber-reinforced poroelastic model based on homogeneous and isotropic simplifications. Biomech Model Mechanobiol 2:83–96

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Mikic B, Isenstein AL, Chhabra A (2004) Mechanical modulation of cartilage structure and function during embryogenesis in the chick. Ann Biomed Eng 32:18–25

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Moukoko D, Pithioux M, Chabrand P (2007) Temporal evolution of mechanical properties of skeletal tissue regeneration in rabbits: an experimental study. Med Biol Eng Comput 45:989–995

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. O’Driscoll SW, Fitzsimmons JS (2001) The role of periosteum in cartilage repair. Clin Orthopaed Relat Res 391(Suppl):S190–S207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Oliver WC, Pharr GM (1992) An improved technique for determining hardness and elastic modulus using load and displacement sensing indentation experiments. J Mater Res 7(6):1564–1583

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Oliver WC, Pharr GM (2004) Measurement of hardness and elastic modulus by instrumented indentation: advances in understanding and refinements to methodology. J Mater Res 19(1):3–20

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Pailler-Mattéi C, Zahouani H (2006) Analysis of adhesive behaviour of human skin in vivo by an indentation test. Tribol Int 39:12–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Pailler-Mattei C, Bec S, Zahouani H (2008) In vivo measurements of the elastic mechanical properties of human skin by indentation tests. Med Eng Phys 30:599–606

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Pharr GM, Oliver WC, Brotzen FR (1992) On the Generality of the Relationship Between Contact Stiffness, Contact Area, and Elastic Moduli During Indentation. J Mater Res 7:613–617

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Prendergast PJ, Huiskes R, Soballe K (1997) ESB Research Award 1996, Biophysical stimuli on cells during tissue differentiation at implant interfaces. J Biomech 30:539–548

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Räsänen T, Messner K (1996) Regional variations of indentation stiffness and thickness of normal rabbit knee articular cartilage. J Biomed Mater Res 31:519–524

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Roemhildt ML, Coughlin KM, Peura GD, Fleming BD, Beynnon BD (2006) Material properties of articular cartilage in the rabbit tibial plateau. J Biomech 39:2331–2337

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Simon TM, Van Sickle DC, Kunishima DH, Jackson DW (2003) Cambium cell stimulation from surgical release of the periosteum. J Orthop Res 21:470–480

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Soons JAM, Aernouts J, Dirckx JJJ (2010) Elasticity modulus of rabbit middle ear ossicles determined by a novel micro-indentation technique. Hear Res 263:33–37

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Zhang J, Niebur GL, Ovaert TC (2008) Mechanical property determination of bone through nano- and micro-indentation testing and finite element simulation. J Biomech 41(2):267–275

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institut des Sciences du Mouvement, Aix Marseille Université, CNRS-UMR 6233, 13009, Marseille, France

    Remy Casanova, Didier Moukoko, Martine Pithioux & Patrick Chabrand

  2. Laboratoire de Tribologie et Dynamiques des Systèmes, Université de Lyon, Ecole Centrale de Lyon, UMR-CNRS 5513, 69130, Ecully, France

    Cyril Pailler-Mattéi & Hassan Zahouani

  3. Laboratoire de Biophysique, Université de Lyon, Faculté de Pharmacie ISPB, 69003, Lyon, France

    Cyril Pailler-Mattéi

  4. Institut des Sciences du Mouvement E.J.Marey, Equipe GIBO, Université de la méditerranée, 163 avenue de Luminy, case 918, 13288, Marseille Cedex 09, France

    Martine Pithioux

Authors
  1. Remy Casanova
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Didier Moukoko
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Martine Pithioux
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Cyril Pailler-Mattéi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Hassan Zahouani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Patrick Chabrand
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Martine Pithioux.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Casanova, R., Moukoko, D., Pithioux, M. et al. Temporal evolution of skeletal regenerated tissue: what can mechanical investigation add to biological?. Med Biol Eng Comput 48, 811–819 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11517-010-0637-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11517-010-0637-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation