CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 24Osteoarthritis Treatment and MechanismsTissue Engineering and Regenerative MedicineBone Tissue Engineering Materials

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Importance of Controlled Mismatch of Biomechanical Compliances of Implantable Scaffolds and Native Tissue for Articular Cartilage Regeneration

Open access
Gasik, Michael, Zühlke, Alexandra, Haaparanta, Anne-Marie, Muhonen, Virpi, Laine, Kaisa, Bilotsky, Yevgen, Kellomäki, Minna, Kiviranta, Ilkka·2018·Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
DOI 10.3389/fbioe.2018.00187PMC PMC6287196
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Scaffolds for articular cartilage repair have to be optimally biodegradable with simultaneous promotion of hyaline cartilage formation under rather complex biomechanical and physiological conditions. It has been generally accepted that scaffold structure and composition would be the best when it mimics the structure of native cartilage. However, a reparative construct mimicking the mature native tissue in a healing tissue site presents a biological mismatch of reparative stimuli. In this work, we studied a new recombinant human type III collagen-polylactide (rhCol-PLA) scaffolds. The rhCol-PLA scaffolds were assessed for their relative performance in simulated synovial fluids of 1 and 4 mg/mL sodium hyaluronate with application of model-free analysis with Biomaterials Enhanced Simulation Test (BEST). Pure PLA scaffold was used as a control. The BEST results were compared to the results of a prior in vivo study with rhCol-PLA. Collectively the data indicated that a successful articular cartilage repair require lower stiffness of the scaffold compared to surrounding cartilage yet matching the strain compliance both in static and dynamic conditions. This ensures an optimal combination of load transfer and effective oscillatory nutrients supply to the cells. The results encourage further development of intelligent scaffold structures for optimal articular cartilage repair rather than simply trying to imitate the respective original tissue.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/fbioe.2018.00187

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Mismatch of mechanical properties and degradation rate makes it difficult to meet clinical use needs.

    “the mismatch of mechanical properties and degradation rate [7,8]”

    From A strategy to tailor the mechanical and degradation properties of PCL-PEG-PCL based copolymers for biomedical application (2023) · cites this paper as [7]

    The Introduction (page unavailable) says scaffold biomechanics are crucial to treatment success and biodegradation should transfer stress to new tissue over an appropriate period. This supports the importance of both properties, but the paper does not directly say that a mismatch in degradation rate prevents clinical use. Its Discussion (page unavailable) also describes a controlled mechanical mismatch as potentially beneficial, so mechanical mismatch is not uniformly a problem. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 56

  1. Agrawal, 2000, Synthetic Biodegradable Polymers for Implants, 10.1520/STP1396-EB · DOI
  2. Ahsan, 1999, Biomechanics of integrative cartilage repair, Osteoarthr. Cartil., 7, 29, 10.1053/joca.1998.0160 · DOI
  3. Armstrong, 1982, Variations in the intrinsic mechanical properties of human articular cartilage with age, degeneration, and water content, J. Bone Joint Surg., 64, 88, 10.2106/00004623-198264010-00013 · DOI
  4. Benders, 2012, Extracellular matrix scaffolds for cartilage and bone regeneration, Trends Biotechnol., 31, 169, 10.1016/j.tibtech.2012.12.004 · DOI
  5. Bennethum, 1996, Multiscale, hybrid mixture theory for swelling systems–II: constitutive theory, Int. J. Eng. Sci., 34, 147, 10.1016/0020-7225(95)00090-9 · DOI
  6. Bennethum, 2004, Three pressures in porous media, Transp. Porous Media, 54, 1, 10.1023/A:1025701922798 · DOI
  7. Bilotsky, 2015, Modelling of poro-visco-elastic biological systems, J. Phys. Conf. Series, 633, 021234, 10.1088/1742-6596/633/1/012134 · DOI
  8. Burdick, 2011, Biomaterials for Tissue Engineering Applications: A Review of the Past and Future Trends, 564, 10.1007/978-3-7091-0385-2 · DOI
  9. Chung, 2008, Engineering cartilage tissue, Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev., 60, 243, 10.1016/j.addr.2007.08.027 · DOI · Paper page
  10. 2015, Directive 2010/63/EC for Alternative Methods “3R” = Replacement, Reduction, Refinement, Complemented With ‘Stop Vivisection' The European Citizens'
  11. Fam, 2007, Rheological properties of synovial fluids, Biorheology, 44, 59
  12. Frost, 2004, A 2003 update of bone physiology and Wolff's law for clinicians, Angle Orthodont., 74, 3, 10.1043/0003-3219(2004)074<0003:AUOBPA>2.0.CO;2 · DOI
  13. Gasik, 2014, New BEST – biomaterials enhanced simulation test, J. Tissue Sci. Eng., 5, 66, 10.4172/2157-7552.S1.014 · DOI
  14. Gasik, In vitro Test Method for Implant Materials.
  15. Gasik, Understanding biomaterial-tissue interface quality: combined in vitro evaluation, Sci. Techn. Adv. Mater., 18, 550, 10.1080/14686996.2017.1348872 · DOI · Paper page
  16. Gasik, 2018, High-output screening and biomechanical optimization of biomaterials for orthopaedic applications, Orthopaed. Proc., S44S3
  17. Gasik, 2017, Biomechanical comparison for commercial and novel scaffolds for articular cartilage repair, Orthopaed. Proc., 79
  18. Gerisch, 2006, Robust numerical methods for taxis-diffusion-reaction systems: applications to biomedical problems, Mathem. Comput. Model., 43, 49, 10.1016/j.mcm.2004.05.016 · DOI
  19. Gomes, 2004, Biodegradable polymers and composites in biomedical applications: from catgut to tissue engineering, Intern. Mater. Rev., 49, 261, 10.1179/095066004225021918 · DOI
  20. Goode, 1977, Long-term stenting in the treatment of subglottic stenosis, Ann. Otol. Rhinol. Laryngol., 86, 795, 10.1177/000348947708600613 · DOI
  21. Gunawardena, 1996, An Introduction to Idempotency, 50
  22. Haaparanta, 2014, Preparation and characterization of collagen/PLA, chitosan/PLA, and collagen/chitosan/PLA hybrid scaffolds for cartilage tissue engineering, J. Mater. Sci. Mater. Med., 25, 1129, 10.1007/s10856-013-5129-5 · DOI
  23. Hayes, 1972, Some viscoelastic properties of human articular cartilage, Acta Orthop. Belg., 38, 23
  24. Hayes, 1978, Flow-independent viscoelastic properties of articular cartilage matrix, J. Biomech., 11, 407, 10.1016/0021-9290(78)90075-1 · DOI
  25. Hayes, 1971, Viscoelastic properties of human articular cartilage, J. Appl. Physiol., 31, 562, 10.1152/jappl.1971.31.4.562 · DOI
  26. Hosseini, 2014, How preconditioning affects the measurement of poro-viscoelastic mechanical properties in biological tissues, Biomech. Model. Mechanobiol., 13, 503, 10.1007/s10237-013-0511-2 · DOI
  27. Kempson, 1971, The determination of a creep modulus for articular cartilage from indentation tests of the human femoral head, J. Biomech., 4, 239, 10.1016/0021-9290(71)90030-3 · DOI
  28. King, 1966, A rheological measurement of three synovial fluids, Rheol Acta, 5, 41, 10.1007/BF01973577 · DOI
  29. Kobayashi, 1994, Viscoelasticity of hyaluronic acid with different molecular weights, Biorheology, 31, 235, 10.3233/BIR-1994-31302 · DOI
  30. Korhonen, 2006, Collagen network of articular cartilage modulates fluid flow and mechanical stresses in chondrocyte, Biomech. Model. Mechanobiol., 5, 150, 10.1007/s10237-006-0021-6 · DOI
  31. Korhonen, 2002, Comparison of the equilibrium response of articular cartilage in unconfined compression, confined compression and indentation, J. Biomech., 35, 903, 10.1016/S0021-9290(02)00052-0 · DOI
  32. Lai, 1991, A triphasic theory for the swelling and deformation behaviors of articular cartilage, J. Biomech. Eng., 113, 245, 10.1115/1.2894880 · DOI
  33. Lai, 1981, Effects of nonlinear strain-dependent permeability and rate of compression on the stress behavior of articular cartilage, J. Biomech. Eng, 103, 61, 10.1115/1.3138261 · DOI
  34. Länsman, 2006, Poly-L/D-lactide (PLDLA) 96/4 fibrous implants: histological evaluation in the subcutis of experimental design, J. Craniofac. Surg., 17, 1121, 10.1097/01.scs.0000231627.33382.85 · DOI
  35. Litvinov, 2001, Idempotent functional analysis: an algebraic approac, Mathem. Notes, 69, 696, 10.1023/A:1010266012029 · DOI
  36. Lubarda, 2008, On the elastic moduli and compliances of transversely isotropic and orthotropic materials, J. Mech. Mater. Struct., 3, 153, 10.2140/jomms.2008.3.153 · DOI
  37. Lujan, 2011, A novel bioreactor for the dynamic stimulation and mechanical evaluation of multiple tissue-engineered constructs, Tissue Eng. C, 17, 367, 10.1089/ten.tec.2010.0381 · DOI
  38. Mak, 1987, Biphasic indentation of articular cartilage—I. Theoretical analysis, J. Biomech., 20, 703, 10.1016/0021-9290(87)90036-4 · DOI
  39. Mäkelä, 2016, Highly non-linear stress-relaxation response of articular cartilage in indentation: importance of collagen nonlinearity, J. Biomech., 49, 1734, 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2016.04.00 · DOI
  40. Maslov, 1970, The characteristics of pseudo-differential operators and difference schemes, Actes Congrès. Intern. Math., 2, 755
  41. Milan, 2010, Simulation of bone tissue formation within a porous scaffold under dynamic compression, Biomech. Model. Mechanobiol., 9, 583, 10.1007/s10237-010-0199-5 · DOI
  42. Mollon, 2013, The clinical status of cartilage tissue regeneration in humans, Osteoarthr. Cartil., 21, 1824, 10.1016/j.joca.2013.08.024 · DOI
  43. Mow, 1980, Biphasic creep and stress relaxation of articular cartilage in compression: theory and experiments, J. Biomech. Eng., 102, 73, 10.1115/1.3138202 · DOI
  44. Muhonen, 2016, Articular cartilage repair with recombinant human type II collagen/polylactide scaffold in a preliminary porcine study, J. Orthopaed. Res., 34, 745, 10.1002/jor.23099 · DOI
  45. Norris, 2008, Eulerian conjugate stress and strain, J. Mech. Mater. Struct., 3, 243, 10.2140/jomms.2008.3.243 · DOI
  46. Panadero, 2016, Differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells for cartilage tissue engineering: individual and synergetic effects of three-dimensional environment and mechanical loading, Acta Biomater., 33, 1, 10.1016/j.actbio.2016.01.037 · DOI
  47. Pioletti, 2000, Non-linear viscoelastic laws for soft biological tissues, Eur. J. Mech. A Solids, 19, 749, 10.1016/S0997-7538(00)00202-3 · DOI
  48. Pulliainen, 2007, Poly-L-D-lactic acid scaffold in the repair of porcine knee cartilage lesions, Tissue Eng, 13, 1347, 10.1089/ten.2006.0347 · DOI
  49. Sittichokechaiwut, 2010, Short bouts of mechanical loading are as effective as dexamethasone at inducing matrix production by human bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells, Eur. Cells Mater, 20, 45, 10.22203/eCM.v020a05 · DOI
  50. 2010, Guidance for the Use of Bayesian Statistics in Medical Device Clinical Trials.
  51. Volfson, 2008, Biomechanical ordering of dense cell populations, PNAS, 105, 15346, 10.1073/pnas.0706805105 · DOI
  52. von Recum, 1998, Handbook of Biomaterials Evaluation, ed., 916
  53. Wilson, 2006, A composition-based cartilage model for the assessment of compositional changes during cartilage damage and adaptation, Osteoarthr. Cartil., 14, 554, 10.1016/j.joca.2005.12.006 · DOI
  54. Wilson, 2005, A comparison between mechano-electrochemical and biphasic swelling theories for soft hydrated tissues, J. Biomech. Eng. Trans. ASME, 127, 158, 10.1115/1.1835361 · DOI
  55. Wong, 2007, Biomaterials, 296, 10.1201/9780849378898 · DOI
  56. Xiao, 1995, Invariant characteristic representations for classical and micropolar anisotropic elasticity tensors, J. Elasticity, 40, 239, 10.1007/BF00043958 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Gasik, M., Zühlke, A., Haaparanta, A.-M., Muhonen, V., Laine, K., Bilotsky, Y., Kellomäki, M., & Kiviranta, I.
Affiliations
  • Aalto University (FI)
  • Tampere University of Technology (FI)
  • University of Helsinki (FI)
  • Tampere University (FI)
Corresponding author
Gasik, Michael
ORCID
Venue
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
Publisher
Frontiers Media SA
Published
2018-11-30
Volume
6
Pages
187-187
ISSN
2296-4185 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.3389/fbioe.2018.00187
PMC
PMC6287196
OpenAlex
W2902076452
Cited by
24
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2
FWCI
2.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Tampere University Institutional Repository (Tampere University) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Aaltodoc (Aalto University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Työväentutkimus Vuosikirja (submittedVersion)
  • Tampere University Institutional Repository (Tampere University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Tekes (40190/13, 40113/13, 40171/14, 40172/14)
  • European Commission (760921)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rheumatology › Osteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Bone Tissue Engineering Materials
Keywords
articular cartilage regeneration, implantable scaffolds, scaffold stiffness, type III collagen, polylactic acid, sodium hyaluronate, synovial fluid, load transfer, nutrient supply, cartilage repair

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review