Full biomechanical mapping of the ovine knee joint to determine creep-recovery, stiffness and thickness variation. (July 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Pflieger, Iris; Stolberg-Stolberg, Josef; Foehr, Peter; Kuntz, Lara; Tübel, Jutta; Grosse, Christian U.; Burgkart, Rainer
• Is Part Of: Clinical biomechanics. Volume 67(2019)
• Page Start: 1
• Page End: 7
• Publication Date: 2019-07
• Subjects: Articular cartilage -- Knee joint -- Sheep model -- Indentation -- Creep-recovery -- Stiffness -- Thickness -- Mapping; Biomechanics -- Periodicals; Osteopathic medicine -- Periodicals; Biomechanics -- Periodicals; Osteopathic Medicine -- Periodicals; 612.76
• DOI: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2019.04.015
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0268-0033

Abstract

Abstract: Background: Clinical cartilage repair strategies can be tested using the sheep model as suggest by the European Medicines Agency. To characterize variation within the joint a full biomechanical mapping is necessary. The aim of this study is to establish a loading model, to map regional differences within the knee and determine reference areas for area specific replacement techniques. Methods: A porous indenter was selected to evaluate 22 defined test locations (femoral condyles, tibia plateau, patella, femoral groove) on ovine knees (n = 7). A high-dynamic force-controlled micro creep and creep-recovery indentation test system applied five loading (0.11 MPa) and unloading (5.6 kPa) cycles for 60 s each and recorded creep-recovery. Needle indentation was used to measure cartilage thickness and calculate total strain. Findings: Steady state behaviour was observed from the third cycle and further evaluated. Little variation of stiffness in N/mm was found within the patella (4.3SD0.5) and femoral groove (8.1SD0.7) compared to larger variations in the femur (7.9SD2.0) and tibia (7.5SD3.2). Creep indentation showed values of 14.5%(SD2.7%) for the patella and 17.4%(SD3%) for the femoral grove opposed to 13.4%(SD4.3%) for the femoral condyles and 21.8%(SD6.6%) for the tibia plateau. Similar trends were observed analysing creep-recovery. Values were normalized to cartilage thickness which ranged between 0.36 mm and 1.14 mm. Interpretation: Our setup allows a reliable evaluation of zonal differences. Homogenous biomechanical behaviour is found within the patella and femoral groove whereas significant biomechanical variation within the femoral condyles and tibia plateau indicates the need for site-specific cartilage repair products. Highlights: Clinical cartilage repair strategies need be developed site-specific. Creep and creep-recovery indentation mimics physiological loading and unloading. Mapping shows zonal variation of stiffness, creep, creep-recovery and thickness. Cartilage replacement materials need to be designed according to joint region.