Measurement of bone surface strains on the sheep metacarpus in vivo and ex vivo

Anisotropic mechanical properties of ovine femoral periosteum and the effects of cryopreservation

The mechanical properties of periosteum are not well characterized. An understanding of these properties is critical to predict the environment of pluripotent and osteochondroprogenitor cells that reside within the periosteum and that have been shown recently to exhibit a remarkably rapid capacity to generate bone de novo. Furthermore, the effects of cryopreservation on periosteal mechanical properties are currently unknown. We hypothesized that the periosteum is pre-stressed in situ and that the periosteum exhibits anisotropic material properties, e.g. the elastic modulus of the periosteum depends significantly on the direction of loading. We measured the change in area, axial length, and circumferential length of anterior, posterior, medial, and lateral fresh periosteal samples removed from underlying bone (t=0-16 h) as well as the average strain in axially and circumferentially oriented anterior periosteal samples subjected to tensile strain (0.004 mm/s) until failure. The elastic modulus was calculated from the resulting stress-strain curves. Tensile testing was repeated with axially aligned samples that had been slowly cryopreserved for comparison to fresh samples. Periosteal samples from all aspects shrank 44-54%, 33-47%, and 9-19% in area, axial length, and circumferential length, respectively. At any given time, the periosteum shrank significantly more in the axial direction than the circumferential direction. Tensile testing showed that the periosteum is highly anisotropic. When loaded axially, a compliant toe region of the stress-strain curve (1.93±0.14 MPa) is followed by a stiffer region until failure (25.67±6.87 MPa). When loaded circumferentially, no toe region is observable and the periosteum remained compliant until failure (4.41±1.21 MPa). Cryopreservation had no significant effect on the elastic modulus of the periosteum. As the periosteum serves as the bounding envelope of the femur, anisotropy in periosteal properties may play a key role in modulating bone growth, healing and adaptation, in health, disease, and trauma.

Major and minor centroidal axes serve as objective, automatable reference points to test mechanobiological hypotheses using histomorphometry

Recent studies show that minor and major centroidal axes (CA) of long bone cross sections provide valuable predictions of prevailing loading patterns in age and treatment matched cohorts of animals. Furthermore, using CA, we recently showed that the degree of mineralization and area of woven bone laid down in the first two weeks after creation of a critical sized bone defect relate inversely and correlate significantly to loading patterns. Here, we aim to determine how closely independent measures of the spatial distribution of bone apposition determined using the major and minor CA as reference points correlate to those using anatomically defined axes as reference points. In histological sections from the previous study, we found no statistically significant difference between the anatomical and centroidal axes with respect to the centroid location or axis rotation, but there is a significant albeit small difference in the average distance between centroids. Outcome measures calculated in areas of bone defined by 15°, 30°, 45°, 60°, or 90° sectors when using the CA differ less than 5% from those calculated using anatomical axes as reference points. Hence, the major and minor CA provide objective reference points for comparison of mechanobiological outcome measures between animals in matched cohorts. Calculation of major and minor CA is automated, which reduces the potential for observer bias. A major advantage of using the major and minor CA as reference points is that it allows for direct relation of outcome measures to loading patterns in age and treatment matched cohorts, ultimately providing a tool to test mechanobiological hypotheses on histological cross sections of bone.

Top down and bottom up engineering of bone

The goal of this retrospective article is to place the body of my lab's multiscale mechanobiology work in context of top-down and bottom-up engineering of bone. We have used biosystems engineering, computational modeling and novel experimental approaches to understand bone physiology, in health and disease, and across time (in utero, postnatal growth, maturity, aging and death, as well as evolution) and length scales (a single bone like a femur, m; a sample of bone tissue, mm-cm; a cell and its local environment, μm; down to the length scale of the cell's own skeleton, the cytoskeleton, nm). First we introduce the concept of flow in bone and the three calibers of porosity through which fluid flows. Then we describe, in the context of organ-tissue, tissue-cell and cell-molecule length scales, both multiscale computational models and experimental methods to predict flow in bone and to understand the flow of fluid as a means to deliver chemical and mechanical cues in bone. Addressing a number of studies in the context of multiple length and time scales, the importance of appropriate boundary conditions, site specific material parameters, permeability measures and even micro-nanoanatomically correct geometries are discussed in context of model predictions and their value for understanding multiscale mechanobiology of bone. Insights from these multiscale computational modeling and experimental methods are providing us with a means to predict, engineer and manufacture bone tissue in the laboratory and in the human body.