A novel device for resistance-free biomechanical testing of the metaphysis of long bones

BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders

Leila Harhaus¹  Ulrich Kneser¹  Bernd Hoener²  Dimitra Kotsougiani¹  Helmut Harhaus³  Christoph Hirche¹  Gina Alicia Mackert¹ 

[1] Department for Hand-, Plastic- and Reconstructive Surgery – Burn Care Center – BG-Trauma Clinic Ludwigshafen, Department for Plastic Surgery of the University of Heidelberg, Ludwig-Guttmann-Str. 13, 67071 Ludwigshafen, Germany;Department of Social and Legal Sciences, SRH Hochschule Heidelberg, Ludwig-Guttmann-Str. 6, 69123 Heidelberg, Germany;Technical and medical devices development and invention center, Remscheid, Germany

关键词: Osteoporosis;    Metaphyseal bone;    Biomechanical devices;    Bending and breaking test;    Biomechanical testing;    Biomechanics;   

Others  :  1125458
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2474-15-245

 received in 2014-05-07, accepted in 2014-07-14,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

Biomechanical testing is an essential component of bone research. In order to test the metaphyseal region of long bones, a typical location for the nowadays increasing field of osteoporotic bone changes, three-point bending and breaking test devices are suitable and widely used. The aim of our study was to increase the effectiveness of this method by using a newly developed ball-mounted platform design. This new design eliminates the negative effects of friction, present in previous studies, caused by the lengthening of the distal tibia along its diaphyseal axis while sliding over the surface of a fixed aluminum block.

Methods

70 tibiae of 35 twelve week old, female Sprague Dawley rats were separated into two groups for a metaphyseal bending/breaking test. Group 1 was made up of the rat’s right tibiae, Group 2 of the left tibiae. Group 1 was tested on a solid metal block according to previously established testing devices whereas Group 2 was tested on the newly designed device: the resistance-free gliding, ball-mounted platform. Stiffness (N/mm), yield Load (N), and failure Load (N) were registered. In the evaluation of both testing procedures, the results of the right and left tibiae were compared according to the rat they originated from.

Results

Stiffness (S) showed highly significant differences (p = 0.002) with 202.25 ± 27.010 N/mm SD (Group 1) and 184.66 ± 35.875 N/mm SD (Group 2). Yield Load (yL) showed highly significant differences (p < 0.001) with 55.31 ± 13.074 N SD (Group1) and 37.17 ± 12.464 N SD (Group2). The mean failure Load (fL) did not differ significantly (p < 0.231) between Group 1: 81.34 ± 11.972 N SD and Group 2: 79.63 ± 10.345 N SD.

Conclusions

We therefore conclude that, used in the three-point bending/breaking test, the mobile, ball-mounted platform device is able to efficiently eliminate the influence of friction in terms of stiffness and yield load. Failure Load was not affected. We suggest that the new ball-mounted platform device, when compared to other existing techniques, generates more accurate test results when used in the three-point bending/breaking test of the metaphysis of long bones.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Mackert et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

Figure 5.

Figure 6.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Ritchie RO, Koester KJ, Inova S, Yao W, Lane NE, Ager JW: Measurement of the toughness of bone: a tutorial with special reference to small animal studies. Bone 2008, 43(5):798-812.
• [2]Stuermer EK, Seidlova-Wuttke D, Sehmisch S, Rack T, Wille J, Frosch KH, Wuttke W, Stuermer KM: Standardized bending and breaking test for the normal and osteoporotic metaphyseal tibias of the rat: effect of estradiol, testosterone, and raloxifene. J Bone Miner Res 2006, 21(1):89-96.
• [3]Peck WA: Concencus development conference: diagnosis, prophylaxis, and treatment of osteoporosis. Am J Med 1993, 94:646-650.
• [4]Comelekoglu U, Bagis S, Yalin S, Ogenler O, Yildiz A, Sahin NO, Oguz I, Hatungil R: Biomechanical evaluation in osteoporosis: ovariectomized rat model. Clin Rheumatol 2007, 26(3):380-384.
• [5]Curtis R, Goldhahn J, Schwyn R, Regazzoni P, Suhm N: Fixation principles in metaphyseal bone-a patent based review. Osteoporos Int 2005, 16:54-64.
• [6]Tezval M, Banhardt A, Sehmisch S, Kolios L, Schmelz U, Stuermer KM, Stuermer EK: The effects of parathyroid hormone applied at different regimes on the trochanteric region of the femur in ovariectomized rat model of osteoporosis. J Osteoporos 2011, 2011:363617.
• [7]Tezval M, Bibilis M, Sehmisch S, Schmelz U, Kolios L, Rack T, Stuermer KM, Stuermer EK: Improvement of femoral bone quality after low-magnitude, high-frequency mechanical stimulation in the ovariectomized rat as an osteopenia model. Calcif Tissue Int 2011, 88(1):33-40.
• [8]Kolios L, Daub F, Sehmisch S, Frosch KH, Tezval M, Stuermer KM, Wuttke W, Stuermer EK: Absence of positive effect of black cohosh (Cimicifuga racemosa) on fracture healing in osteopenic rodent model. Phytother Res 2010, 24(12):1796-1806.
• [9]Kolios L, Schumann J, Sehmisch S, Rack T, Tezval M, Seidlova-Wuttke D, Frosch KH, Stuermer KM, Stuermer EK: Effects of black cohosh (Cimicifuga racemosa) and estrogen on metaphyseal fracture healing in the early stages of osteoporosis in ovariectomized rats. Planta Med 2010, 76(9):850-857.
• [10]Sehmisch S, Erren M, Kolios L, Tezval M, Seidlova-Wuttke D, Wuttke W, Stuermer KM, Stuermer EK: Effects of isoflavones equol and genistein on bone quality in a rat osteopenia model. Phytother Res 2010, 24(Suppl 2):S168-S174.
• [11]Sehmisch S, Galal R, Kolios L, Tezval M, Dullin C, Zimmer S, Stuermer KM, Stuermer EK: Effects of low-magnitude, high-frequency mechanical stimulation in the rat osteopenia model. Osteoporos Int 2009, 20(12):1999-2008.
• [12]Stuermer EK, Komrakova M, Werner C, Wicke M, Kolios L, Sehmisch S, Tezval M, Utesch C, Mangal O, Zimmer S, Dullin C, Stuermer KM: Musculoskeletal response to whole-body vibration during fracture healing in intact and ovariectomized rats. Calcif Tissue Int 2010, 87(2):168-180.
• [13]Komrakova M, Sehmisch S, Tezval M, Schmelz U, Frauendorf H, Grueger T, Wessling T, Klein C, Birth M, Stuermer KM, Stuermer EK: Impact of 4-methylbenzylidene camphor, daidzein, and estrogen on intact and osteotomized bone in osteopenic rats. J Endocrinol 2011, 211(2):157-168.
• [14]IOF: A History of the International Osteoporosis Foundation. Switzerland: 15 Years of Fighting Osteoporosis; 2002.
• [15]WHO, World Health Organization: 2008–2013 Action Plan for the Global Strategy for the PRevention and Control of Noncommunicable Diseases. Geneva: WHO; 2008.
• [16]Burge R, Dawson-Hughes B, Solomon DH, Wong JB, King A, Tosteson A: Incidence and economic burden of osteoporosis-related fractures in the United States, 2005–2025. J Bone Miner Res 2007, 22(3):465-475.
• [17]Dempster DW: Osteoporosis and the Burden of Osteoporosis-Related Fractures. Am J Manage Care 2011, 17:164-169.
• [18]Kolios L, Hoerster AK, Sehmisch S, Malcherek MC, Rack T, Tezval M, Seidlova-Wuttke D, Wuttke W, Stuermer KM, Stuermer EK: Do estrogen and alendronate improve metaphyseal fracture healing when applied as osteoporosis prophylaxis? Calcif Tissue Int 2010, 86(1):23-32.
• [19]Wronski TJ, Lowry PL, Walsch CC, Ignaszewski LA: Skeletal Alterations in Ovariectomized Rats. Calcif Tissue Int 1985, 37:324-328.
• [20]Thompson DD, Simmons HA, Pirie CM, Ke HZ: FDA Guidelines and Animal Models for Osteoporosis. Bone 1995, 17(4):125-133.
• [21]Claes L, Veeser A, Gockelmann M, Simon U, Ignatius A: A novel model to study metaphyseal bone healing under defined biomechanical conditions. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2009, 129(7):923-928.
• [22]Kopperdahl DL, Keaveny TM: Yield strain behavior of trabecular bone. J Biomech 1998, 31:601-608.
• [23]Keaveny TM, Wachtel EF, Ford CM, Hayes WC: Differences betweeen the tensile and compressive strengths of bovine tibial trabecular bone depend on modulus. J Biomech 1994, 27(9):1137-1146.
• [24]Lee W, Jasiuk I: Effects of freeze-thaw and micro-computed tomography irradiation on structure–property relations of porcine trabecular bone. J Biomech 2014, 47(6):1495-1498.
• [25]Lewandrowski KU, Schollmeier G, Ekkemkamp A, Uhthoff HK, Tomford WW: Incorporation of perforated and demineralized cortical bone allografts. Part II: A mechanical and hitologic evaluation. Biomed Mater Eng 2001, 11:209-219.
• [26]Bramer JA, Barentsen RH, vd Elst M, De Lange ESM, Patka P, Haarman HJ: Representative assessment of long bone shaft biomechanical properties: An optimized testing method. J Biomech 1998, 31:741-745.
• [27]Peter CP, Cook WO, Nunamaker DM, Provost MT, Seedor JG, Rodan GA: Effect of alendronate on fracture healing and bone remodeling in dogs. J Orthop Res 1996, 14(1):74-79.
• [28]Baumgart E: Stiffness - an unknown world of mechanical science? Inj Int J Care Injured 2000, 31:B14-B23.
• [29]Tezval M, Stuermer EK, Sehmisch S, Rack T, Stary A, Stebener M, Konietschke F, Stuermer KM: Improvement of trochanteric bone quality in an osteoporosis model after short-term treatment with parathyroid hormone: a new mechanical test for trochanteric region of rat femur. Osteoporos Int 2010, 21(2):251-261.
• [30]Komrakova M, Sehmisch S, Tezval M, Ammon J, Lieberwirth P, Sauerhoff C, Trautmann L, Wicke M, Dullin C, Stuermer KM, Stuermer EK: Identification of a vibration regime favorable for bone healing and muscle in estrogen-deficient rats. Calcif Tissue Int 2013, 92(6):509-520.
• [31]Sehmisch S, Uffenorde J, Maehlmayer S, Tezval M, Jarry H, Stuermer KM, Stuermer EK: Evaluation of bone quality and quantity in osteoporotic mice–the effects of genistein and equol. Phytomedicine 2010, 17(6):424-430.