Journal Home > Volume 10 , Issue 1
Friction 2022, 10(1): 110-127 https://doi.org/10.1007/s40544-020-0468-y
Research Article | Open Access | Issue | Published: 07 January 2021

Investigation of role of cartilage surface polymer brush border in lubrication of biological joints

Show Author's Information JinJing LIAO1,  David W. SMITH2,  Saeed MIRAMINI1,  Bruce S. GARDINER3,  Lihai ZHANG1( )
Department of Infrastructure Engineering, The University of Melbourne, Victoria 3010, Australia
Faculty of Engineering and Mathematical Sciences, The University of Western Australia, WA 6009, Australia
College of Science, Health, Engineering and Education, Murdoch University, WA 6150, Australia
Keywords:
articular cartilage, polymer brush border, cartilage surface roughness, permeability of cartilage contact gap, fluid load support in cartilage contact gap
Cite this article:
LIAO J, SMITH DW, MIRAMINI S, et al. Investigation of role of cartilage surface polymer brush border in lubrication of biological joints. Friction, 2022, 10(1): 110-127. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40544-020-0468-y
Download citation
EndNote(RIS)
BibTeX

587

Views

16

Downloads

Citations

17

Crossref

15

WoS

17

Scopus

2

CSCD

Abstract Full text About this article

Although experimental evidence has suggested that the polymer brush border (PBB) on the cartilage surface is important in regulating fluid permeability in the contact gap, the current theoretical understanding of joint lubrication is still limited. To address this research gap, a multiscale cartilage contact model that includes PBB, in particular its effect on the fluid permeability of the contact gap, is developed in this study. Microscale modeling is employed to estimate the permeability of the contact gap. This permeability is classified into two categories: For a gap size > 1 μm, the flow resistance is assumed to be dominated by the cartilage roughness; for gap size < 1 μm, flow resistance is assumed to be dominated by the surface polymers extending beyond the collagen network of the articular cartilage. For gap sizes of less than 1 μm, the gap permeability decreases exponentially with increasing aggrecan concentration, whereas the aggrecan concentration varies inversely with the gap size. Subsequently, the gap permeability is employed in a macroscale cartilage contact model, in which both the contact gap space and articular cartilage are modeled as two interacting poroelastic systems. The fluid exchange between these two media is achieved by imposing pressure and normal flux continuity boundary conditions. The model results suggest that PBB can substantially enhance cartilage lubrication by increasing the gap fluid load support (e.g., by 26 times after a 20-min indentation compared with the test model without a PBB). Additionally, the fluid flow resistance of PBB sustains the cartilage interstitial fluid pressure for a relatively long period, and hence reduces the vertical deformation of the tissue. Furthermore, it can be inferred that a reduction in the PBB thickness impairs cartilage lubrication ability.


menu
Abstract
Full text
Outline
About this article

Investigation of role of cartilage surface polymer brush border in lubrication of biological joints

Show Author's information JinJing LIAO1, David W. SMITH2, Saeed MIRAMINI1, Bruce S. GARDINER3, Lihai ZHANG1( )
Department of Infrastructure Engineering, The University of Melbourne, Victoria 3010, Australia
Faculty of Engineering and Mathematical Sciences, The University of Western Australia, WA 6009, Australia
College of Science, Health, Engineering and Education, Murdoch University, WA 6150, Australia

Abstract

Although experimental evidence has suggested that the polymer brush border (PBB) on the cartilage surface is important in regulating fluid permeability in the contact gap, the current theoretical understanding of joint lubrication is still limited. To address this research gap, a multiscale cartilage contact model that includes PBB, in particular its effect on the fluid permeability of the contact gap, is developed in this study. Microscale modeling is employed to estimate the permeability of the contact gap. This permeability is classified into two categories: For a gap size > 1 μm, the flow resistance is assumed to be dominated by the cartilage roughness; for gap size < 1 μm, flow resistance is assumed to be dominated by the surface polymers extending beyond the collagen network of the articular cartilage. For gap sizes of less than 1 μm, the gap permeability decreases exponentially with increasing aggrecan concentration, whereas the aggrecan concentration varies inversely with the gap size. Subsequently, the gap permeability is employed in a macroscale cartilage contact model, in which both the contact gap space and articular cartilage are modeled as two interacting poroelastic systems. The fluid exchange between these two media is achieved by imposing pressure and normal flux continuity boundary conditions. The model results suggest that PBB can substantially enhance cartilage lubrication by increasing the gap fluid load support (e.g., by 26 times after a 20-min indentation compared with the test model without a PBB). Additionally, the fluid flow resistance of PBB sustains the cartilage interstitial fluid pressure for a relatively long period, and hence reduces the vertical deformation of the tissue. Furthermore, it can be inferred that a reduction in the PBB thickness impairs cartilage lubrication ability.

Keywords: articular cartilage, polymer brush border, cartilage surface roughness, permeability of cartilage contact gap, fluid load support in cartilage contact gap

References(49)

[1]
Kutzner I, Heinlein B, Graichen F, Bender A, Rohlmann A, Halder A, Beier A, Bergmann G. Loading of the knee joint during activities of daily living measured in vivo in five subjects. J Biomech 43(11): 2164-2173 (2010)
DOI Google Scholar
[2]
Jay G D, Waller K A. The biology of Lubricin: Near frictionless joint motion. Matrix Biol 39: 17-24 (2014)
DOI Google Scholar
[3]
McCutchen C W. The frictional properties of animal joints. Wear 5(1): 1-17 (1962)
DOI Google Scholar
[4]
Walker P S, Dowson D, Longfield M D, Wright V. “Boosted lubrication” in synovial joints by fluid entrapment and enrichment. Ann Rheum Dis 27(6): 512-520 (1968)
DOI Google Scholar
[5]
Klein J. Hydration lubrication. Friction 1(1): 1-23 (2013)
DOI Google Scholar
[6]
Ikeuchi K. Origin and future of hydration lubrication. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part J: J Eng Tribol 221(3): 301-305 (2007)
DOI Google Scholar
[7]
Kobayashi S, Yonekubo S, Kurogouchi Y. Cryoscanning electron microscopy of loaded articular cartilage with special reference to the surface amorphous layer. J Anat 188: 311-322 (1996)
Google Scholar
[8]
Hung C T, Mow V C. Biomechanics of articular cartilage. In Basic biomechanics of the musculoskeletal system. Nordin M, Frankel V H, Eds. New York: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2001: 60-101.
[9]
Smith D W, Gardiner B S, Zhang L H, Grodzinsky A J. Articular cartilage dynamic. Singapore: Springer Singapore, 2019.
DOI
[10]
Higaki H, Murakami T, Nakanishi Y, Miura H, Mawatari T, Iwamoto Y. The lubricating ability of biomembrane models with dipalmitoyl phosphatidylcholine and γ- globulin. Proc Inst Mech Eng H 212(5): 337-346 (1998)
DOI Google Scholar
[11]
Seror J, Merkher Y, Kampf N, Collinson L, Day A J, Maroudas A, Klein J. Articular cartilage proteoglycans as boundary lubricants: Structure and frictional interaction of surface-attached hyaluronan and hyaluronan-aggrecan complexes. Biomacromolecules 12(10): 3432-3443 (2011)
DOI Google Scholar
[12]
Lee Y, Choi J, Hwang N S. Regulation of lubricin for functional cartilage tissue regeneration: A review. Biomater Res 22: 9 (2018)
DOI Google Scholar
[13]
Katta J, Jin Z M, Ingham E, Fisher J. Biotribology of articular cartilage—A review of the recent advances. Med Eng Phys 30(10): 1349-1363 (2008)
DOI Google Scholar
[14]
Gu W Y, Lai W M, Mow V C. Transport of fluid and ions through a porous-permeable charged-hydrated tissue, and streaming potential data on normal bovine articular cartilage. J Biomech 26(6): 709-723 (1993)
DOI Google Scholar
[15]
Murakami T, Nakashima K, Sawae Y, Sakai N, Hosoda N. Roles of adsorbed film and gel layer in hydration lubrication for articular cartilage. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part J: J Eng Tribol 223(3): 287-295 (2009)
DOI Google Scholar
[16]
Murakami T, Yarimitsu S, Sakai N, Nakashima K, Yamaguchi T, Sawae Y. Importance of adaptive multimode lubrication mechanism in natural synovial joints. Tribol Int 113: 306-315 (2017)
DOI Google Scholar
[17]
Lee D W, Banquy X, Israelachvili J N. Stick-slip friction and wear of articular joints. PNAS 110(7): E567-E574 (2013)
DOI Google Scholar
[18]
Graindorge S, Ferrandez W, Ingham E, Jin Z, Twigg P, Fisher J. The role of the surface amorphous layer of articular cartilage in joint lubrication. Proc Inst Mech Eng H 220(5): 597-607 (2006)
DOI Google Scholar
[19]
Guo H Q, Spilker R L. An augmented Lagrangian finite element formulation for 3D contact of biphasic tissues. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Eng 17(11): 1206-1216 (2014)
DOI Google Scholar
[20]
Liao J J, Smith D W, Miramini S, Gardiner B S, Zhang L H. A coupled contact model of cartilage lubrication in the mixed-mode regime under static compression. Tribol Int 145: 106185 (2020)
DOI Google Scholar
[21]
Myant C, Cann P. In contact observation of model synovial fluid lubricating mechanisms. Tribol Int 63: 97-104 (2013)
DOI Google Scholar
[22]
Graindorge S, Ferrandez W, Jin Z M, Ingham E, Grant C, Twigg P, Fisher J. Biphasic surface amorphous layer lubrication of articular cartilage. Med Eng Phys 27(10): 836-844 (2005)
DOI Google Scholar
[23]
Forster H, Fisher J. The influence of continuous sliding and subsequent surface wear on the friction of articular cartilage. Proc Inst Mech Eng H 213(4): 329-345 (1999)
DOI Google Scholar
[24]
Jurvelin J S, Müller D J, Wong M, Studer D, Engel A, Hunziker E B. Surface and subsurface morphology of bovine humeral articular cartilage as assessed by atomic force and transmission electron microscopy. J Struct Biol 117(1): 45-54 (1996)
DOI Google Scholar
[25]
Zamparo O, Comper W D. Hydraulic conductivity of chondroitin sulfate proteoglycan solutions. Arch Biochem Biophys 274(1): 259-269 (1989)
DOI Google Scholar
[26]
Schurz J, Ribitsch V. Rheology of synovial fluid. Biorheology 24(4): 385-399 (1987)
DOI Google Scholar
[27]
de Beer S, Kenmoé G D, Müser M H. On the friction and adhesion hysteresis between polymer brushes attached to curved surfaces: Rate and solvation effects. Friction 3(2): 148-160 (2015)
DOI Google Scholar
[28]
Zhang L H, Gardiner B S, Smith D W, Pivonka P, Grodzinsky A J. A fully coupled poroelastic reactive- transport model of cartilage. Mol Cell Biomech 5(2): 133-153 (2008)
Google Scholar
[29]
Zhang L H, Miramini S, Smith D W, Gardiner B S, Grodzinsky A J. Time evolution of deformation in a human cartilage under cyclic loading. Ann Biomed Eng 43(5): 1166-1177 (2015)
DOI Google Scholar
[30]
Barker M K, Seedhom B B. The relationship of the compressive modulus of articular cartilage with its deformation response to cyclic loading: Does cartilage optimize its modulus so as to minimize the strains arising in it due to the prevalent loading regime? Rheumatology 40(3): 274-284 (2001)
DOI Google Scholar
[31]
Mow V C, Kuei S C, Lai W M, Armstrong C G. Biphasic creep and stress relaxation of articular cartilage in compression: Theory and experiments. J Biomech Eng 102(1): 73-84 (1980)
DOI Google Scholar
[32]
Zhang L H, Gardiner B S, Smith D W, Pivonka P, Grodzinsky A J. Igf uptake with competitive binding in articular cartilage. J Biol Syst 16(2): 175-195 (2008)
DOI Google Scholar
[33]
Miramini S, Smith D W, Zhang L H, Gardiner B S. The spatio-temporal mechanical environment of healthy and injured human cartilage during sustained activity and its role in cartilage damage. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 74: 1-10 (2017)
DOI Google Scholar
[34]
Wedig M, Bae W, Temple M, Sah R, Gray M. GAG profiles in normal human articular cartilage. In 51st Annal Meeting of the Orthopedic Research Society, Washington D.C., USA, 2005: post No. 0358.
[35]
Setton L A, Elliott D M, Mow V C. Altered mechanics of cartilage with osteoarthritis: Human osteoarthritis and an experimental model of joint degeneration. Osteoarthr Cartil 7(1): 2-14 (1999)
DOI Google Scholar
[36]
Treppo S, Koepp H, Quan E C, Cole A A, Kuettner K E, Grodzinsky A J. Comparison of biomechanical and biochemical properties of cartilage from human knee and ankle pairs. J Orthop Res 18(5): 739-748 (2000)
DOI Google Scholar
[37]
Liao J J, Smith D W, Miramini S, Thibbotuwawa N, Gardiner B S, Zhang L H. The investigation of fluid flow in cartilage contact gap. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 95: 153-164 (2019)
DOI Google Scholar
[38]
Wu Y B, Ferguson S J. The influence of cartilage surface topography on fluid flow in the intra-articular gap. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Eng 20(3): 250-259 (2017)
DOI Google Scholar
[39]
Liao J J, Miramini S, Liu X C, Zhang L H. Computational study on synovial fluid flow behaviour in cartilage contact gap under osteoarthritic condition. Comput Biol Med 123: 103915 (2020)
DOI Google Scholar
[40]
Robinson D L, Kersh M E, Walsh N C, Ackland D C, de Steiger R N, Pandy M G. Mechanical properties of normal and osteoarthritic human articular cartilage. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 61: 96-109 (2016)
DOI Google Scholar
[41]
Ateshian G A. A theoretical formulation for boundary friction in articular cartilage. J Biomech Eng 119(1): 81-86 (1997)
DOI Google Scholar
[42]
Pascovici M D, Cicone T. Squeeze-film of unconformal, compliant and layered contacts. Tribol Int 36(11): 791-799 (2003)
DOI Google Scholar
[43]
COMSOL. CFD Module User’s Guide, Version 5.3, 2017.
[44]
Goodwin D W, Wadghiri Y Z, Zhu H Q, Vinton C J, Smith E D, Dunn J F. Macroscopic structure of articular cartilage of the tibial plateau: Influence of a characteristic matrix architecture on MRI appearance. Am J Roentgenol 182(2): 311-318 (2004)
DOI Google Scholar
[45]
Ateshian G A. The role of interstitial fluid pressurization in articular cartilage lubrication. J Biomech 42(9): 1163-1176 (2009)
DOI Google Scholar
[46]
Halonen K S, Mononen M E, Jurvelin J S, Töyräs J, Salo J, Korhonen R K. Deformation of articular cartilage during static loading of a knee joint- Experimental and finite element analysis. J Biomech 47(10): 2467-2474 (2014)
DOI Google Scholar
[47]
Forster H, Fisher J. The influence of loading time and lubricant on the friction of articular cartilage. Proc Inst Mech Eng H 210(2): 109-119 (1996)
DOI Google Scholar
[48]
Accardi M A, Dini D, Cann P M. Experimental and numerical investigation of the behaviour of articular cartilage under shear loading—Interstitial fluid pressurisation and lubrication mechanisms. Tribol Int 44(5): 565-578 (2011)
DOI Google Scholar
[49]
Basser P J, Schneiderman R, Bank R A, Wachtel E, Maroudas A. Mechanical properties of the collagen network in human articular cartilage as measured by osmotic stress technique. Archives of Biochemistry and Biophysics 351(2): 207-219 (1998).
DOI Google Scholar
Publication history
Copyright
Acknowledgements
Rights and permissions

Publication history

Received: 16 July 2020
Revised: 03 October 2020
Accepted: 29 October 2020
Published: 07 January 2021
Issue date: January 2022

Copyright

© The author(s) 2020

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by the Australian Research Council (DP180100915) and the Graduate Research Scholarship by the University of Melbourne.

Rights and permissions

This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Return