Community challenge towards consensus on characterization of biological tissue: C4Bio’s first findings

Famaey, Nele ; Fehervary, Heleen ; Lafon, Yoann ; Akyildiz, Ali ; Dreesen, Silke ; Bruyère-Garnier, Karine ; Allain, Jean-Marc ; Alloisio, Marta ; Aparici-Gil, Alejandro ; Catalano, Chiara ; Chassagne, Fanette ; Chokhandre, Snehal ; Crevits, Kimberly ; Crielaard, Hanneke ; Cunnane, Eoghan ; Cunnane, Connor ; De Leener, Karen ; Desai, Amisha ; Driessen, Rob ; Erdemir, Ahmet ; Eskandari, Mona ; Evans, Sam ; Gasser, Christian ; Gebhardt, Marc ; Glasmacher, Birgit ; Holzapfel, Gerhard A. ; Isasi, Mikel ; Jennings, Louise ; Kurz, Sascha ; Leal-Marin, Sara ; Lecomte, Pauline ; Morch, Annie ; Mulvihill, John ; Nemavhola, Fulufhelo ; Pandelani, Thanyani ; Pasta, Salvatore ; Peña, Estefania (Universidad de Zaragoza) ; Pierrat, Baptiste ; Ploeg, Heidi-Lynn ; Polzer, Stanislav ; Rausch, Manuel ; Schwarz, David ; Screen, Hazel ; Sherifova, Selda ; Sommer, Gerhard ; Wang, Shengzhang ; Walsh, Darragh ; Yadav, Deepesh ; Marchal, Thierry ; Geris, Liesbet

Resumen: This study investigates methodological variability across various expert laboratories worldwide, with regards to characterizing the mechanical properties of biological tissues. Two testing rounds were conducted on the specific use case of uniaxial tensile testing of porcine aorta. In the first round, 24 labs were invited to apply their established methods to assess inter-laboratory variability. This revealed significant methodological diversity and associated variability in the stress–stretch results, underscoring the necessity for a standardized approach.
In the second round, a consensus protocol was collaboratively developed and adopted by 19 labs in an attempt to minimize variability. This involved standardized sample preparation and uniformity in testing protocol, including the use of a common cutting and thickness measurement tool. Despite protocol harmonization, significant variability persisted across labs, which could not be solely attributed to inherent biological differences in tissue samples.
These results illustrate the challenges in unifying testing methods across different research settings, underlining the necessity for further refinement of testing practices. Enhancing consistency in biomechanical experiments is pivotal when comparing results across studies, as well as when using the resulting material properties for in silico simulations in medical research.

Idioma: Inglés

DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2025.113021

Año: 2026

Publicado en: Journal of Biomechanics 194 (2026), 113021 [15 pp.]
ISSN: 0021-9290

Tipo y forma: Artículo (PostPrint)

Área (Departamento): Área Mec.Med.Cont. y Teor.Est. (Dpto. Ingeniería Mecánica)