Viscoelastic Properties of Human and Bovine Articular Cartilage: a Comparison of Frequency-dependent Trends

Overview

Journal BMC Musculoskelet Disord

Publisher Biomed Central

Specialties Orthopedics
Physiology

Date 2016 Oct 8

PMID 27716169

Citations 21

Authors

Duncan K Temple

Anna A Cederlund

Bernard M Lawless

Richard M Aspden

Daniel M Espino

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: The purpose of this study was to compare the frequency-dependent viscoelastic properties of human and bovine cartilage.

Methods: Full-depth cartilage specimens were extracted from bovine and human femoral heads. Using dynamic mechanical analysis, the viscoelastic properties of eight bovine and six human specimens were measured over the frequency range 1 Hz to 88 Hz. Significant differences between bovine and human cartilage viscoelastic properties were assessed using a Mann-Whitney test (p < 0.05).

Results: Throughout the range of frequencies tested and for both species, the storage modulus was greater than the loss modulus and both were frequency-dependent. The storage and loss moduli of all human and bovine cartilage specimens presented a logarithmic relationship with respect to frequency. The mean human storage modulus ranged from 31.9 MPa to 43.3 MPa, while the mean bovine storage modulus ranged from 54.0 MPa to 80.5 MPa; bovine storage moduli were 1.7 to 1.9 times greater than the human modulus. Similarly, the loss modulus of bovine cartilage was 2.0 to 2.1 times greater than human. The mean human loss modulus ranged from 5.3 MPa to 8.5 MPa while bovine moduli ranged from 10.6 MPa to 18.1 MPa.

Conclusion: Frequency-dependent viscoelastic trends of bovine articular cartilage were consistent with those of human articular cartilage; this includes a similar frequency dependency and high-frequency plateau. Bovine cartilage was, however, 'stiffer' than human by a factor of approximately 2. With these provisos, bovine articular cartilage may be a suitable dynamic model for human articular cartilage.

Citing Articles

Direct Scaffold-Coupled Electrical Stimulation of Chondrogenic Progenitor Cells through Graphene Foam Bioscaffolds to Control Mechanical Properties of Graphene Foam - Cell Composites.

Sawyer M, Semodji A, Nielson O, Rektor A, Burgoyne H, Eppel M Res Sq. 2025; .

PMID: 39764126 PMC: 11703340. DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-5589589/v1.

Biomechanics of the Human Osteochondral Unit: A Systematic Review.

Berni M, Marchiori G, Baleani M, Giavaresi G, Lopomo N Materials (Basel). 2024; 17(7).

PMID: 38612211 PMC: 11012636. DOI: 10.3390/ma17071698.

A Traumatic Impact Immediately Changes the Mechanical Properties of Articular Cartilage.

Blom R, Rahim D, Paardekam E, Kerkhoffs G, Iannuzzi D, Smit T Cartilage. 2024; :19476035241235633.

PMID: 38501455 PMC: 11569663. DOI: 10.1177/19476035241235633.

Magnetic-Responsive Carbon Nanotubes Composite Scaffolds for Chondrogenic Tissue Engineering.

Saranya M, da Silva A, Karjalainen H, Klinkenberg G, Schmid R, McDonagh B Adv Healthc Mater. 2023; 12(30):e2301787.

PMID: 37660271 PMC: 11468560. DOI: 10.1002/adhm.202301787.

Development and experimental validation of a dynamic numerical model for human articular cartilage.

Mellors B, Allen P, Lavecchia C, Mountcastle S, Cooke M, Lawless B Proc Inst Mech Eng H. 2023; 237(7):879-889.

PMID: 37345411 PMC: 10350737. DOI: 10.1177/09544119231180901.

References

Sadeghi H, Shepherd D, Espino D . Effect of the variation of loading frequency on surface failure of bovine articular cartilage. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2015; 23(12):2252-2258. DOI: 10.1016/j.joca.2015.06.002. View

Shepherd D, Seedhom B . A technique for measuring the compressive modulus of articular cartilage under physiological loading rates with preliminary results. Proc Inst Mech Eng H. 1997; 211(2):155-65. DOI: 10.1243/0954411971534278. View

Fick J, M Espino D . Articular cartilage surface rupture during compression: investigating the effects of tissue hydration in relation to matrix health. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2011; 4(7):1311-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2011.04.018. View

Taylor S, Tsiridis E, Ingham E, Jin Z, Fisher J, Williams S . Comparison of human and animal femoral head chondral properties and geometries. Proc Inst Mech Eng H. 2012; 226(1):55-62. DOI: 10.1177/0954411911428717. View

Pearson B, M Espino D . Effect of hydration on the frequency-dependent viscoelastic properties of articular cartilage. Proc Inst Mech Eng H. 2013; 227(11):1246-52. DOI: 10.1177/0954411913501294. View

Burgin L, Aspden R . Impact testing to determine the mechanical properties of articular cartilage in isolation and on bone. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2007; 19(2):703-11. DOI: 10.1007/s10856-007-3187-2. View

Schmitz N, Laverty S, Kraus V, Aigner T . Basic methods in histopathology of joint tissues. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2010; 18 Suppl 3:S113-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.joca.2010.05.026. View

Plumb M, Aspden R . The response of elderly human articular cartilage to mechanical stimuli in vitro. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2005; 13(12):1084-91. DOI: 10.1016/j.joca.2005.07.002. View

Wallace D, Salem G, Salinas R, Powers C . Patellofemoral joint kinetics while squatting with and without an external load. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2002; 32(4):141-8. DOI: 10.2519/jospt.2002.32.4.141. View

10.

Yao J, Unsworth A . Asperity lubrication in human joints. Proc Inst Mech Eng H. 1993; 207(4):245-54. DOI: 10.1243/PIME_PROC_1993_207_303_02. View

11.

Loparic M, Wirz D, Daniels A, Raiteri R, VanLandingham M, Guex G . Micro- and nanomechanical analysis of articular cartilage by indentation-type atomic force microscopy: validation with a gel-microfiber composite. Biophys J. 2010; 98(11):2731-40. PMC: 2877335. DOI: 10.1016/j.bpj.2010.02.013. View

12.

Nia H, Han L, Li Y, Ortiz C, Grodzinsky A . Poroelasticity of cartilage at the nanoscale. Biophys J. 2011; 101(9):2304-13. PMC: 3207157. DOI: 10.1016/j.bpj.2011.09.011. View

13.

McCormack T, Mansour J . Reduction in tensile strength of cartilage precedes surface damage under repeated compressive loading in vitro. J Biomech. 1998; 31(1):55-61. DOI: 10.1016/s0021-9290(97)00103-6. View

14.

Shepherd D, Seedhom B . Thickness of human articular cartilage in joints of the lower limb. Ann Rheum Dis. 1999; 58(1):27-34. PMC: 1752762. DOI: 10.1136/ard.58.1.27. View

15.

Loening A, James I, Levenston M, Badger A, Frank E, Kurz B . Injurious mechanical compression of bovine articular cartilage induces chondrocyte apoptosis. Arch Biochem Biophys. 2000; 381(2):205-12. DOI: 10.1006/abbi.2000.1988. View

16.

Barnes S, Shepherd D, Espino D, Bryan R . Frequency dependent viscoelastic properties of porcine bladder. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2014; 42:168-76. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2014.11.017. View

17.

Kaab M, Gwynn I, Notzli H . Collagen fibre arrangement in the tibial plateau articular cartilage of man and other mammalian species. J Anat. 1998; 193 ( Pt 1):23-34. PMC: 1467820. DOI: 10.1017/s0021878298003744. View

18.

Smit T . The use of a quadruped as an in vivo model for the study of the spine - biomechanical considerations. Eur Spine J. 2002; 11(2):137-44. PMC: 3610505. DOI: 10.1007/s005860100346. View

19.

Barker M, Seedhom B . The relationship of the compressive modulus of articular cartilage with its deformation response to cyclic loading: does cartilage optimize its modulus so as to minimize the strains arising in it due to the prevalent loading regime?. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2001; 40(3):274-84. DOI: 10.1093/rheumatology/40.3.274. View

20.

Jurvelin J, Buschmann M, Hunziker E . Optical and mechanical determination of Poisson's ratio of adult bovine humeral articular cartilage. J Biomech. 1997; 30(3):235-41. DOI: 10.1016/s0021-9290(96)00133-9. View