4.4 Review

Mechanical Testing of Hydrogels in Cartilage Tissue Engineering: Beyond the Compressive Modulus

期刊

TISSUE ENGINEERING PART B-REVIEWS
卷 19, 期 5, 页码 403-412

出版社

MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC
DOI: 10.1089/ten.teb.2012.0461

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIH/NIBIB [R21 EB008783]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Injuries to articular cartilage result in significant pain to patients and high medical costs. Unfortunately, cartilage repair strategies have been notoriously unreliable and/or complex. Biomaterial-based tissue-engineering strategies offer great promise, including the use of hydrogels to regenerate articular cartilage. Mechanical integrity is arguably the most important functional outcome of engineered cartilage, although mechanical testing of hydrogel-based constructs to date has focused primarily on deformation rather than failure properties. In addition to deformation testing, as the field of cartilage tissue engineering matures, this community will benefit from the addition of mechanical failure testing to outcome analyses, given the crucial clinical importance of the success of engineered constructs. However, there is a tremendous disparity in the methods used to evaluate mechanical failure of hydrogels and articular cartilage. In an effort to bridge the gap in mechanical testing methods of articular cartilage and hydrogels in cartilage regeneration, this review classifies the different toughness measurements for each. The urgency for identifying the common ground between these two disparate fields is high, as mechanical failure is ready to stand alongside stiffness as a functional design requirement. In comparing toughness measurement methods between hydrogels and cartilage, we recommend that the best option for evaluating mechanical failure of hydrogel-based constructs for cartilage tissue engineering may be tensile testing based on the single edge notch test, in part because specimen preparation is more straightforward and a related American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) standard can be adopted in a fracture mechanics context.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据