Related Experiment Video
Updated: Apr 23, 2026

Design of a Biaxial Mechanical Loading Bioreactor for Tissue Engineering
Published on: April 25, 2013
From theory to tissue: Constitutive modeling and underlying assumptions in cartilage biomechanics
Renaud E V I Amoakon1, Ariane Lavoie-Hudon2, Martine Gagnon3
1Département de kinésiologie, Groupe de recherche en analyse du mouvement et ergonomie (GRAME), 2300 rue de la Terrasse, Quebec, G1V 0A6, QC, Canada; Centre de recherche du CHU de Québec - Université Laval, Axe Médecine régénératrice, 2400 Av. D'Estimauville, Quebec, G1E 6W2, Canada; Centre interdisciplinaire de recherche en réadaptation et intégration sociale (CIRRIS), 525 Bd Wilfrid-Hamel, Quebec, G1M 2S8, Canada; LBMC, UMR T9406, Univ Lyon 1 - Gustave Eiffel - Claude Bernard, 43 Bd du 11 Novembre 1918, Villeurbanne, 69100, France.
Abstract:
Articular cartilage is a charged, multiphasic tissue whose mechanical response emerges from coupled solid-fluid-ion interactions. Modeling this complexity remains a major challenge in computational biomechanics. This scoping review maps cartilage constitutive models and provides a structured, mechanics-informed appraisal of their physiological representation, constitutive assumptions, and numerical implementation practices. Database searches (1995-2025) identified 84 eligible studies. Models were classified into monophasic, biphasic, triphasic, and other constitutive families. To systematically assess modeling assumptions, a mechanics-oriented appraisal framework structured around five evaluation axes (M1-M5) was applied, addressing constitutive closure, dissipative mechanisms, internal physical admissibility constraints, model-problem coherence, and verification/validation practices. Biphasic models dominate current practice, whereas triphasic formulations better capture osmotic and electrochemical effects. Physiological features were represented unevenly across studies: stress relaxation (86.9%), fluid exudation (69.0%), strain-dependent permeability (48.8%), zonal anisotropy (51.2%), and electrochemical coupling (16.7%). Degeneration mechanisms were incorporated in only 23.8% of studies. Across the corpus, most models demonstrated strong model-problem coherence but frequently lacked explicit admissibility constraints and robust verification and validation practices. Numerical transparency was also limited: although software platforms were often reported, solver configuration, convergence criteria, and computational cost were rarely specified. These findings highlight a persistent gap between constitutive sophistication and empirical validation. Advancing predictive cartilage modeling will require closer integration between constitutive formulation, experimental validation, parameter identifiability, and reproducible numerical implementation.
Related Concept Videos
Growth of Cartilage and Bone Tissue
Bone Formation by Endochondral Ossification
Development of the Limb Synovial Joints
The mesenchymal stem cells differentiate into chondrocytes that form the hyaline cartilage, and later the cartilaginous model of the bone. This model further transforms into a bone. This process is known as endochondral ossification.
During development, the limbs...
Mechanistic Models: Overview of Compartment Models
Structural Joints: Cartilaginous Joints
There are two types of cartilaginous joints:
Synchondrosis
A synchondrosis ("joined by cartilage") is a cartilaginous joint where bones are connected by hyaline cartilage. Synchondrosis may be temporary...
Bending of Members Made of Several Materials
Hooke's Law determines stress in each material, stating that stress is proportional to strain but varies due to each material's...

