A review of the characterizations of soft tissues used in human body modeling: Scope, limitations, and the path forward. Issue 2 (May 2023)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Arnold, Nicole; Scott, Justin; Bush, Tamara Reid
• Is Part Of: Journal of tissue viability. Volume 32:Issue 2(2023)
• Page Start: 286
• Page End: 304
• Publication Date: 2023-05
• Subjects: Soft tissue -- Material properties -- Human body properties -- Material model -- Review; Wounds and injuries -- Periodicals; Ulcers -- Periodicals; Bedsores -- Periodicals; Bedsores; Ulcers; Wounds and injuries; Electronic journals; Periodicals; 617.1406
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jtv.2023.02.003
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0965-206X

Abstract

Abstract: Soft tissue material properties are vital to human body models that evaluate interactions between the human body and its environment. Such models evaluate internal stress/strain responses in soft tissues to investigate issues like pressure injuries. Numerous constitutive models and parameters have been used to represent mechanical behavior of soft tissues in biomechanical models under quasi-static loading. However, researchers reported that generic material properties cannot accurately represent specific target populations due to large inter-individual variability. Two challenges that exist are experimental mechanical characterization and constitutive modeling of biological soft tissues and personalization of constitutive parameters using non-invasive, non-destructive bedside testing methods. It is imperative to understand the scope and appropriate applications for reported material properties. Thus, the goal of this paper was to compile studies from which soft tissue material properties were obtained and categorize them by source of tissue samples, methods used to quantify deformation, and material models used to describe tissues. The collected studies displayed wide ranges of material properties, and factors that affected the properties included whether tissue samples were in vivo or ex vivo, from humans or animals, the body region tested, body position during in vivo studies, deformation measurements, and material models used to describe tissues. Because of the factors that affected reported material properties, it is clear that much progress has been made in understanding soft tissue responses to loading, yet there is a need to broaden the scope of reported soft tissue material properties and better match reported properties to appropriate human body models. Highlights: Soft tissue properties were collected from animals and humans, in-vivo and ex-vivo . Sample source, body region and position, and testing conditions affected properties. Models and tissue properties should match to ensure realistic approximations. Guidelines for reporting uncertainty in models depend on material characterization. Growing efforts in personalized soft tissue properties may reduce uncertainty.