Display options
Cite
Erdemir A, Bennetts C, Davis S, et al. Multiscale cartilage biomechanics: technical challenges in realizing a high-throughput modelling and simulation workflow. Interface Focus. 2015;5(2):20140081doi: 10.1098/rsfs.2014.0081.
Erdemir, A., Bennetts, C., Davis, S., Reddy, A., & Sibole, S. (2015). Multiscale cartilage biomechanics: technical challenges in realizing a high-throughput modelling and simulation workflow. Interface focus, 5(2), 20140081. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsfs.2014.0081
Erdemir, Ahmet, et al. "Multiscale cartilage biomechanics: technical challenges in realizing a high-throughput modelling and simulation workflow." Interface focus vol. 5,2 (2015): 20140081. doi: https://doi.org/10.1098/rsfs.2014.0081
Erdemir A, Bennetts C, Davis S, Reddy A, Sibole S. Multiscale cartilage biomechanics: technical challenges in realizing a high-throughput modelling and simulation workflow. Interface Focus. 2015 Apr 06;5(2):20140081. doi: 10.1098/rsfs.2014.0081. PMID: 25844153; PMCID: PMC4342949.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Interface Focus. 2015 Apr 06;5(2):20140081. doi: 10.1098/rsfs.2014.0081.

Multiscale cartilage biomechanics: technical challenges in realizing a high-throughput modelling and simulation workflow.

Interface focus

Ahmet Erdemir, Craig Bennetts, Sean Davis, Akhil Reddy, Scott Sibole

Affiliations

  1. Computational Biomodeling (CoBi) Core , Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic , Cleveland, OH 44195 , USA ; Department of Biomedical Engineering , Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic , Cleveland, OH 44195 , USA.
  2. Computational Biomodeling (CoBi) Core , Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic , Cleveland, OH 44195 , USA ; Department of Biomedical Engineering , Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic , Cleveland, OH 44195 , USA ; Department of Mechanical Engineering , University of Akron , Akron, OH 44325 , USA.
  3. Computational Biomodeling (CoBi) Core , Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic , Cleveland, OH 44195 , USA ; Department of Biomedical Engineering , Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic , Cleveland, OH 44195 , USA ; Weill Cornell Medical College , New York, NY 10065 , USA.
  4. Computational Biomodeling (CoBi) Core , Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic , Cleveland, OH 44195 , USA ; Department of Biomedical Engineering , Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic , Cleveland, OH 44195 , USA ; Human Performance Laboratory, Faculty of Kinesiology , University of Calgary , Calgary, Alberta , Canada T2N 1N4.

PMID: 25844153 PMCID: PMC4342949 DOI: 10.1098/rsfs.2014.0081

Abstract

Understanding the mechanical environment of articular cartilage and chondrocytes is of the utmost importance in evaluating tissue damage which is often related to failure of the fibre architecture and mechanical injury to the cells. This knowledge also has significant implications for understanding the mechanobiological response in healthy and diseased cartilage and can drive the development of intervention strategies, ranging from the design of tissue-engineered constructs to the establishment of rehabilitation protocols. Spanning multiple spatial scales, a wide range of biomechanical factors dictate this mechanical environment. Computational modelling and simulation provide descriptive and predictive tools to identify multiscale interactions, and can lead towards a greater comprehension of healthy and diseased cartilage function, possibly in an individualized manner. Cartilage and chondrocyte mechanics can be examined in silico, through post-processing or feed-forward approaches. First, joint-tissue level simulations, typically using the finite-element method, solve boundary value problems representing the joint articulation and underlying tissue, which can differentiate the role of compartmental joint loading in cartilage contact mechanics and macroscale cartilage field mechanics. Subsequently, tissue-cell scale simulations, driven by the macroscale cartilage mechanical field information, can predict chondrocyte deformation metrics along with the mechanics of the surrounding pericellular and extracellular matrices. A high-throughput modelling and simulation framework is necessary to develop models representative of regional and population-wide variations in cartilage and chondrocyte anatomy and mechanical properties, and to conduct large-scale analysis accommodating a multitude of loading scenarios. However, realization of such a framework is a daunting task, with technical difficulties hindering the processes of model development, scale coupling, simulation and interpretation of the results. This study aims to summarize various strategies to address the technical challenges of post-processing-based simulations of cartilage and chondrocyte mechanics with the ultimate goal of establishing the foundations of a high-throughput multiscale analysis framework. At the joint-tissue scale, rapid development of regional models of articular contact is possible by automating the process of generating parametric representations of cartilage boundaries and depth-dependent zonal delineation with associated constitutive relationships. At the tissue-cell scale, models descriptive of multicellular and fibrillar architecture of cartilage zones can also be generated in an automated fashion. Through post-processing, scripts can extract biphasic mechanical metrics at a desired point in the cartilage to assign loading and boundary conditions to models at the lower spatial scale of cells. Cell deformation metrics can be extracted from simulation results to provide a simplified description of individual chondrocyte responses. Simulations at the tissue-cell scale can be parallelized owing to the loosely coupled nature of the feed-forward approach. Verification studies illustrated the necessity of a second-order data passing scheme between scales and evaluated the role that the microscale representative volume size plays in appropriately predicting the mechanical response of the chondrocytes. The tools summarized in this study collectively provide a framework for high-throughput exploration of cartilage biomechanics, which includes minimally supervised model generation, and prediction of multiscale biomechanical metrics across a range of spatial scales, from joint regions and cartilage zones, down to that of the chondrocytes.

Keywords: cartilage; chondrocyte; extracellular; finite-element analysis; pericellular; post-processing

References

  1. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2002 Jul;10(7):564-72 - PubMed
  2. Med Biol Eng Comput. 2009 Dec;47(12):1281-90 - PubMed
  3. Biomech Model Mechanobiol. 2006 Jun;5(2-3):123-32 - PubMed
  4. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2013 Dec;21(12):1904-12 - PubMed
  5. Ann Biomed Eng. 2011 Sep;39(9):2388-97 - PubMed
  6. J Biomech Eng. 2008 Apr;130(2):021003 - PubMed
  7. Arthritis Rheum. 2001 Nov;44(11):2556-61 - PubMed
  8. Ann Biomed Eng. 2012 Nov;40(11):2456-74 - PubMed
  9. FASEB J. 1989 Jul;3(9):2042-51 - PubMed
  10. J Biomech. 2013 Jun 21;46(10):1641-7 - PubMed
  11. J Biomech Eng. 2009 Jun;131(6):061003 - PubMed
  12. J Biomech. 2014 Mar 21;47(5):1004-13 - PubMed
  13. J Biomech Eng. 2013 Nov;135(11):111001 - PubMed
  14. Acta Biomater. 2013 Apr;9(4):5943-55 - PubMed
  15. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2005 Nov;37(11):1924-30 - PubMed
  16. J Orthop Res. 2013 Mar;31(3):370-5 - PubMed
  17. Mol Cell Biomech. 2009 Jun;6(2):113-9 - PubMed
  18. Stem Cell Res Ther. 2013 Jul 01;4(4):61 - PubMed
  19. J Biomech. 2000 Dec;33(12):1663-73 - PubMed
  20. J Biomech. 2007;40(6):1405-9 - PubMed
  21. Proc Inst Mech Eng H. 2010;224(8):927-43 - PubMed
  22. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2007 Sep;15(9):1042-52 - PubMed
  23. J Biomech Eng. 2013 Feb;135(2):021003 - PubMed
  24. Ann Anat. 2005 Nov;187(5-6):473-85 - PubMed
  25. J Biomech. 2013 Feb 1;46(3):586-92 - PubMed
  26. Anat Rec. 2002 Apr 1;266(4):241-8 - PubMed
  27. J Biomech Eng. 2012 Jan;134(1):011005 - PubMed
  28. J Biomech Eng. 2014 Mar;136(3):035001 - PubMed
  29. J Biomech. 2010 Mar 3;43(4):658-65 - PubMed
  30. Matrix Biol. 2014 Oct;39:25-32 - PubMed
  31. Biomech Model Mechanobiol. 2012 Sep;11(7):983-93 - PubMed
  32. Arthritis Rheum. 2008 Jan;58(1):26-35 - PubMed
  33. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004 Oct;(427 Suppl):S96-103 - PubMed
  34. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2007 Feb;22(2):131-54 - PubMed
  35. J Musculoskelet Neuronal Interact. 2006 Oct-Dec;6(4):379-81 - PubMed
  36. Ann Biomed Eng. 2004 Oct;32(10):1443-52 - PubMed
  37. Interface Focus. 2015 Apr 6;5(2):20140081 - PubMed
  38. Biomech Model Mechanobiol. 2013 Aug;12(4):763-80 - PubMed
  39. J Biomech Eng. 2012 Sep;134(9):091005 - PubMed
  40. Annu Rev Biomed Eng. 2000;2:691-713 - PubMed
  41. Med Eng Phys. 2005 Dec;27(10):810-26 - PubMed
  42. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin. 2015;18(12):1293-304 - PubMed
  43. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2001 Aug;9(6):561-9 - PubMed
  44. PLoS One. 2012;7(5):e37538 - PubMed
  45. Eur Cell Mater. 2007 May 31;13:100-11; discussion 111 - PubMed
  46. J Biomech. 2002 Jul;35(7):931-42 - PubMed
  47. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin. 2013 Oct;16(10):1112-26 - PubMed
  48. Med Eng Phys. 2009 Oct;31(8):1038-42 - PubMed
  49. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2005 Aug;13(8):672-8 - PubMed
  50. J Biomech. 2011 Mar 15;44(5):930-4 - PubMed

Publication Types

Grant support