Mechanical behavior and biochemical composition of canine knee cartilage following periods of joint disuse and disuse with remobilization

Abstract

The mechanical behavior and biochemical composition of articular cartilage were studied in an experimental model of joint disuse, in which the canine knee was immobilized in a sling at 90 degrees of flexion. Articular cartilage from the surface zone of the femur was tested in an isometric tensile test and full-thickness cartilage on the tibial plateau was tested in a compressive indentation test. Water, proteoglycan and collagen contents were measured in site-matched samples. Site-specific increases in the tensile moduli (approximately 88% above control values in distal femoral groove) were observed in cartilage after 8 weeks of joint disuse, and after 3 weeks of remobilization following either 4 (approximately 140%, distal and proximal femoral groove) or 8 weeks (approximately 140%, distal femoral groove) of joint disuse. In contrast, the compressive properties of cartilage determined in the indentation test exhibited no change from control values with joint disuse or disuse followed by remobilization. Water contents increased at some sites on the tibia after 8 weeks of joint disuse (approximately 6% of tissue wet weight, posterior site), but not in the surface zone tissue of the femur. Proteoglycan/collagen and cartilage thickness were not found to change with disuse or disuse followed by remobilization. Reduced values for the ratio of proteoglycan:water were observed in the surface zone tissue of the femur (approximately 23%, distal femoral groove) and in the full-thickness tissue of the tibia (approximately 21%, anterior and posterior sites) after periods of joint disuse. In this study, the measured material properties suggest that the articular surface remains intact following periods of disuse or disuse with remobilization. This finding suggests one important difference between this model of joint disuse and other experimental models in which cartilage changes are both progressive and degenerative, such as surgically-induced joint instability.

Motion Versus Fixed Distraction of the Joint in the Treatment of Ankle Osteoarthritis

“…Joint motion has been accepted as an essential adjunctive component in the biological restoration of articular cartilage after injury [16][17][18][19][20][21][22] , whereas joint immobilization can be deleterious to joint function 20,[22][23][24] . Distraction alone, particularly with the use of external fixation, carries the potential for the development of arthrofibrosis, which can be deleterious to joint reconstruction 25,26 .…”

Reversibility of Immobilization-Induced Articular Cartilage Degeneration after Remobilization in Rat Knee Joints

“…Immobilization-induced articular cartilage degeneration is generally recognized as disuse atrophy caused by decreased chondrocytes activity (Palmoski et al 1979;Jurvelin et al 1986;Kiviranta et al 1994;Buckwalter 1995;Setton et al 1997). Palmoski et al documented that joint immobilization caused reduced proteoglycan content and synthesis, decreased articular cartilage thickness, but did not change the number of chondrocytes in canine immobilized knee model with a cast (Palmoski et al 1979, Palmoski andBrandt 1981).…”

“…Some reported reversible (Sood 1971;Akeson et al 1977;Palmoski et al 1979, Palmoski andBrandt 1981;Müller et al 1994;Schollmeier et al 1996;Setton et al 1997), partially reversible (Finsterbush and Friedman 1975;Behrens et al 1989;Jurvelin et al 1989;Säämänen et al 1990;Kiviranta et al 1994;Jortikka et al 1997;Haapala et al 1999Haapala et al , 2000Haapala et al , 2001, and others irreversible (Evans et al 1960;Videman et al 1976;Behrens et al 1989). The differences might have originated from duration of immobilization, methods of immobilization (non-rigid and rigid immobilization), measurement sites (non-contact, contact, and transitional areas), and animal species (dog, rat, and rabbit).…”

Intra-articular Injection of Hyaluronan Diminishes Loss of Chondrocytes in a Rat Immobilized-Knee Model

“…There have been many reports of articular cartilage degeneration after immobilization (Evans et al 1960;Thaxter et al 1965;Jurvelin et al 1986;Behrens et al 1989;Setton et al 1997). Because the method of immobilization and evaluated areas were quite different from study to study, the events that occurred in the joint after immobilization have not been clarified (Haapala et al 1999;Trudel et al 2005).…”