Recent Advances in Experimental Testing and Computational Modelling for Characterisation of Mechanical Properties of Biomaterials and Biological Cells

  • V. B. Nguyen
  • C. H. Le
  • Z. Zhang
  • R. Lee
  • T. A. Nguyen
  • M. S. Packianather
Conference paper
Part of the IFMBE Proceedings book series (IFMBE, volume 63)

Abstract

Biomaterials and biological cells possess a number of different properties; amongst them, mechanical properties are extremely important in studies and applications about tissue engineering, design and development of implants, surgical tools and medical devices for treatments and diagnosis of diseases. Changes in mechanical properties such as a stiffness of cells are often the signs of changes in cell physiology or diseases in tissues; and studying these changes can lead to the development of devices for early disease detection and new drug delivery mechanisms. This paper presents advances in recent years in experimental testing and computational modelling for characterisation of mechanical properties of biomaterials and biological cells, in which the presented research projects and related studies were mainly implemented by research groups in the UK. The recent important findings, research directions and challenges are emphasised and discussed, to open channels for research collaborations in development of cost-effective medical diagnosis and treatment solutions.

Keywords

Biomaterials Biological cells Experiment Computational modelling Finite element analysis (FEA) 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Hench LL, Thompson I (2010) Twenty-first century challenges for biomaterials. J R Soc Interface 6–7:379–391CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bhat S, Kumar A (2013) Biomaterials and bioengineering tomorrow’s healthcare. Biomatter 3(3):e24717 (12 pages)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rodriguez ML et al (2013) Review on cell mechanics: experimental and modeling approaches. Appl Mech Rev 65(6):060801 (41 pages)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Thomas G et al (2013) Measuring the mechanical properties of living cells using atomic force microscopy. J Vis Exp 76:e50497Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Alexander X et al (2015) Fast, multi-frequency, and quantitative nanomechanical mapping of live cells using the atomic force microscope. Scientific reports 5, Article number: 11692Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jones WR et al (1999) Alterations in the Young’s modulus and volumetric properties of chondrocytes isolated from normal and osteoarthritic human cartilage. J Biomech 32:119–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Guevorkian KC et al (2010) Aspiration of biological viscoelastic drops. Phys Rev Lett 104:1–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Daniel SJ, Chao L (2008) Noncontact measurement of the local mechanical properties of living cells using pressure applied via a pipette. Biophys J 95:3017–3027CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nguyen VB et al (2009) Mechanical properties of single alginate microspheres determined by microcompression and finite element modelling. Chem Eng Sci 64:821–829CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nguyen VB et al (2010) Biomechanical properties of single chondrocytes and chondrons determined by micromanipulation and finite element modelling. J R Soc Interface 7:1723–1733CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wang QG et al (2009) Gene expression profiles of dynamically compressed single chondrocytes and chondrons. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 379:738–742CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Brown TD (2000) Techniques for mechanical stimulation of cells in vitro: a review. J Biomech 33:3–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Leipzig ND, Athanasiou KA (2005) Unconfined creep compression of chondrocytes. J Biomech 38:77–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lee B et al (2010) Dynamic mechanical properties of the tissue-engineered matrix associated with individual chondrocytes. J Biomech 43:469–476CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Shieh AC et al (2006) Straindependent recovery behavior of single chondrocytes. Biomech Model Mechanobiol 5:172–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lammerding J (2011) Mechanics of nucleus. Compr Physiol 1:783–807Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Peeters EAG et al (2005) Mechanical and failure properties of single attached cells under compression. J Biomech 38:1685–1693CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Setton LA et al (1993) The biphasic poroviscoelastic behavior of articular-cartilage: role of the surface zone in governing the compressive behavior. J Biomech 26:581–592CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • V. B. Nguyen
    • 1
  • C. H. Le
    • 2
  • Z. Zhang
    • 3
  • R. Lee
    • 4
  • T. A. Nguyen
    • 5
  • M. S. Packianather
    • 6
  1. 1.College of Engineering and TechnologyUniversity of DerbyDerbyUK
  2. 2.Faculty of Engineering and ScienceUniversity of GreenwichLondonUK
  3. 3.School of Chemical EngineeringUniversity of BirminghamBirminghamUK
  4. 4.School of Applied SciencesLondon South Bank UniversityLondonUK
  5. 5.Le Quy Don Technical UniversityHanoiVietnam
  6. 6.School of EngineeringCardiff UniversityCardiffUK

Personalised recommendations