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

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

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

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.

Original languageEnglish
Article number113021
JournalJournal of Biomechanics
Volume194
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jan 2026

Keywords

  • Biomechanical characterization
  • Methodological variability
  • Standardization
  • Uncertainty

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Community challenge towards consensus on characterization of biological tissue: C4Bio's first findings'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this