Large animal models play an essential role in the study of tissue engineering and regenerative medicine (TERM), as well as biomechanics. The porcine model has been increasingly used to study the musculoskeletal system, including specific joints, such as the knee and temporomandibular joints, and tissues, such as bone, cartilage, and ligaments. In particular, pigs have been utilized to evaluate the role of skeletal growth on the biomechanics and engineered replacements of these joints and tissues. In this review, we explore the publication history of the use of pig models in biomechanics and TERM discuss interspecies comparative studies, highlight studies on the effect of skeletal growth and other biological considerations in the porcine model, and present challenges and emerging opportunities for using this model to study functional TERM.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
LiebschnerM.A.K.Biomechanical considerations of animal models used in tissue engineering of bone. Biomaterials, 25, 1697, 2004.
2.
JohnstoneB., AliniM., CucchiariniM., DodgeG.R., EglinD., GuilakF., MadryH., MataA., MauckR.L., SeminoC.E., and StoddartM.J.Tissue engineering for articular cartilage repair—the state of the art. Eur Cell Mater, 25, 248, 2013.
3.
ReichertJ.C., SaifzadehS., WullschlegerM.E., EpariD.R., SchutzM.A., DudaG.N., SchellH., van GriensvenM., RedlH., and HutmacherD.W.The challenge of establishing preclinical models for segmental bone defect research. Biomaterials, 30, 2149, 2009.
4.
MuschlerG.F., RautV.P., PattersonT.E., WenkeJ.C., and HollingerJ.O.The design and use of animal models for translational research in bone tissue engineering and regenerative medicine. Tissue Eng Part B Rev, 16, 123, 2010.
5.
WeymannA., PatilN.P., SabashnikovA., KorkmazS., LiS.L., SoosP., IshtokR., ChaimowN., PatzoldI., CzernyN., SchmackB., PopovA.F., SimonA.R., KarckM., and SzaboG.Perfusion-decellularization of porcine lung and trachea for respiratory bioengineering. Artif Organs, 39, 1024, 2015.
6.
Schenke-LaylandK., VasilevskiO., OpitzF., KonigK., RiemannI., HalbhuberK.J., WahlersT., and StockU.A.Impact of decellularization of xenogeneic tissue on extracellular matrix integrity for tissue engineering of heart valves. J Struct Biol, 143, 201, 2003.
7.
AngourasD.C., DosiosT.J., DimitriouC.A., ChamogeorgakisT.P., RokkasC.K., ManosT.A., and SokolisD.P.Surgical thoracic sympathectomy induces structural and biomechanical remodeling of the thoracic aorta in a porcine model. J Surg Res, 172, 68, 2012.
8.
RobertsN., MorticelliL., JinZ., InghamE., and KorossisS.Regional biomechanical and histological characterization of the mitral valve apparatus: implications for mitral repair strategies. J Biomech, 49, 2491, 2016.
9.
RitchieJ., JimenezJ., HeZ., SacksM.S., and YoganathanA.P.The material properties of the native porcine mitral valve chordae tendineae: an in vitro investigation. J Biomech, 39, 1129, 2006.
10.
ElkinB.S., IlankovaA., and MorrisonB.Dynamic, regional mechanical properties of the porcine brain: indentation in the coronal plane. J Biomech Eng, 133, 071009, 2011.
11.
ThibaultK.L., and MarguliesS.S.Age-dependent material properties of the porcine cerebrum: effect on pediatric inertial head injury criteria. J Biomech, 31, 1119, 1998.
12.
HasanA., RagaertK., SwieszkowskiW., SelimovicS., PaulA., Camci-UnalG., MofradM.R.K., and KhademhosseiniA.Biomechanical properties of native and tissue engineered heart valve constructs. J Biomech, 47, 1949, 2014.
13.
MavrilasD., and MissirlisY.An approach to the optimization of preparation of bioprosthetic heart-valves. J Biomech, 24, 331, 1991.
14.
MurphyM.K., ArziB., HuJ.C., and AthanasiouK.A.Tensile characterization of porcine temporomandibular joint disc attachments. J Dent Res, 92, 753, 2013.
15.
O'LearyS.A., LinkJ.M., KlinebergE.O., HuJ.C., and AthanasiouK.A. Characterization of facet joint cartilage properties in the human and interspecies comparisons. Acta Biomater, 2017. doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2017.03.017.
16.
ProffenB.L., McElfreshM., FlemingB.C., and MurrayM.M.A comparative anatomical study of the human knee and six animal species. Knee, 19, 493, 2012.
17.
SweigartM.A., ZhuC.F., BurtD.M., DeHollP.D., AgrawalC.M., ClantonT.O., and AthanasiouK.A.Intraspecies and interspecies comparison of the compressive properties of the medial meniscus. Ann Biomed Eng, 32, 1569, 2004.
18.
XerogeanesJ.W., FoxR.J., TakedaY., KimH.S., IshibashiY., CarlinG.J., and WooS.L-Y.A functional comparison of animal anterior cruciate ligament models to the human anterior cruciate ligament. Ann Biomed Eng, 26, 345, 1998.
19.
CollinsS.L., LaydeP., GuseC.E., SchlotthauerA.E., and Van ValinS.E.The incidence and etiology of anterior cruciate ligament injuries in patients under the age of 18 in the state of wisconsin. Pediatr Ther, 4, 196, 2014.
20.
WernerB.C., YangS., LooneyA.M., and GwathmeyF.W.Jr. Trends in pediatric and adolescent anterior cruciate ligament injury and reconstruction. J Pediatr Orthop, 36, 447, 2016.
21.
FisherM.B., and MauckR.L.Tissue engineering and regenerative medicine: recent innovations and the transition to translation. Tissue Eng Part B Rev, 19, 1, 2013.
22.
LysaghtM.J., and CragerJ.Origins. Tissue Eng Part A, 15, 1449, 2009.
23.
AthanasiouK.A., RosenwasserM.P., BuckwalterJ.A., MalininT.I., and MowV.C.Interspecies comparisons of in situ intrinsic mechanical properties of distal femoral cartilage. J Orthop Res, 9, 330, 1991.
24.
AhernB.J., ParviziJ., BostonR., and SchaerT.P.Preclinical animal models in single site cartilage defect testing: a systematic review. Osteoarthritis Cartilage, 17, 705, 2009.
25.
FrisbieD.D., CrossM.W., and McIlwraithC.W.A comparative study of articular cartilage thickness in the stifle of animal species used in human pre-clinical studies compared to articular cartilage thickness in the human knee. Vet Comp Orthopaed, 19, 142, 2006.
26.
HembryR.M., DyceJ., DriesangI., HunzikerE.B., FosangA.J., TylerJ.A., and MurphyG.Immunolocalization of matrix metalloproteinases in partial-thickness defects in pig articular cartilage—a preliminary report. J Bone Joint Surg Am Vol 83a, 826, 2001.
27.
ChuC.R., SzczodryM., and BrunoS.Animal models for cartilage regeneration and repair. Tissue Eng Part B Rev, 16, 105, 2010.
28.
TantisricharoenkulG., Linde-RosenM., AraujoP., ZhouJ., SmolinskiP., and FuF.H.Anterior cruciate ligament: an anatomical exploration in humans and in a selection of animal species. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc, 22, 961, 2014.
29.
ZainoN.L., HedgelandM.J., CianiM.J., ClarkA.M., KuxhausL., and MichalekA.J.White-tailed deer as an ex vivo knee model: joint morphometry and acl rupture strength. Ann Biomed Eng, 45, 1093, 2017.
30.
ProffenB.L., PerroneG.S., FlemingB.C., SiekerJ.T., KramerJ., HawesM.L., and MurrayM.M.Effect of low-temperature ethylene oxide and electron beam sterilization on the in vitro and in vivo function of reconstituted extracellular matrix-derived scaffolds. J Biomater Appl, 30, 435, 2015.
31.
TeuschlA., HeimelP., NurnbergerS., van GriensvenM., RedlH., and NauT.A novel silk fiber-based scaffold for regeneration of the anterior cruciate ligament: histological results from a study in sheep. Am J Sports Med, 44, 1547, 2016.
32.
MahalingamV.D., Behbahani-NejadN., HorineS.V., OlsenT.J., SmietanaM.J., WojtysE.M., WellikD.M., ArrudaE.M., and LarkinL.M.Allogeneic versus autologous derived cell sources for use in engineered bone-ligament-bone grafts in sheep anterior cruciate ligament repair. Tissue Eng Part A, 21, 1047, 2015.
33.
FisherM.B., LiangR., JungH.J., KimK.E., ZamarraG., AlmarzaA.J., McMahonP.J., and WooS.L-Y.Potential of healing a transected anterior cruciate ligament with genetically modified extracellular matrix bioscaffolds in a goat model. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc, 20, 1357, 2012.
34.
BoguszewskiD.V., ShearnJ.T., WagnerC.T., and ButlerD.L.Investigating the effects of anterior tibial translation on anterior knee force in the porcine model: is the porcine knee acl dependent? J Orthop Res, 29, 641, 2011.
35.
AtarodM., FrankC.B., and ShriveN.G.Increased meniscal loading after anterior cruciate ligament transection in vivo: a longitudinal study in sheep. Knee, 22, 11, 2015.
36.
LivesayG.A., RudyT.W., WooS.L-Y., RuncoT.J., SakaneM., LiG., and FuF.H.Evaluation of the effect of joint constraints on the in situ force distribution in the anterior cruciate ligament. J Orthop Res, 15, 278, 1997.
37.
SkelleyN.W., CastileR.M., CannonP.C., WeberC.I., BrophyR.H., and LakeS.P.Regional variation in the mechanical and microstructural properties of the human anterior cruciate ligament. Am J Sports Med, 44, 2892, 2016.
38.
TakroniT., LaouarL., AdesidaA., ElliottJ.A., and JomhaN.M.Anatomical study: comparing the human, sheep and pig knee meniscus. J Exp Orthop, 3, 35, 2016.
39.
GupteC.M., BullA.M., MurrayR., and AmisA.A.Comparative anatomy of the meniscofemoral ligament in humans and some domestic mammals. Anat Histol Embryol, 36, 47, 2007.
40.
JoshiM.D., SuhJ.K., MaruiT., and WooS.L-Y.Interspecies variation of compressive biomechanical properties of the meniscus. J Biomed Mater Res, 29, 823, 1995.
41.
ArnoczkyS.P., CookJ.L., CarterT., and TurnerA.S.Translational models for studying meniscal repair and replacement: what they can and cannot tell us. Tissue Eng Part B Rev, 16, 31, 2010.
42.
MathewsonM.A., KwanA., EngC.M., LieberR.L., and WardS.R.Comparison of rotator cuff muscle architecture between humans and other selected vertebrate species. J Exp Biol, 217, 261, 2014.
43.
KalpakciK.N., WillardV.P., WongM.E., and AthanasiouK.A.An interspecies comparison of the temporomandibular joint disc. J Dent Res, 90, 193, 2011.
44.
FazaeliS., GhazanfariS., EvertsV., SmitT.H., and KoolstraJ.H.The contribution of collagen fibers to the mechanical compressive properties of the temporomandibular joint disc. Osteoarthritis Cartilage, 24, 1292, 2016.
45.
Baxter-JonesA.D., EisenmannJ.C., and SherarL.B.Controlling for maturation in pediatric exercise science. Pediatr Exerc Sci, 17, 18, 2005.
46.
ReilandS.Growth and skeletal development of the pig. Acta Radiol Suppl, 358, 15, 1978.
47.
GreulichW.W., and PyleS.I.Radiographic atlas of skeletal development of the hand and wrist. Am J Med Sci, 238, 393, 1959.
48.
GoetzJ.E., FredericksD., PetersenE., RudertM.J., BaerT., SwansonE., RobertsN., MartinJ., and TochigiY.A clinically realistic large animal model of intra-articular fracture that progresses to post-traumatic osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis Cartilage, 23, 1797, 2015.
49.
RadfarL., and SiroisD.A.Structural and functional injury in minipig salivary glands following fractionated exposure to 70 gy of ionizing radiation: an animal model for human radiation-induced salivary gland injury. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod, 96, 267, 2003.
50.
JiangC.C., ChiangH., LiaoC.J., LinY.J., KuoT.F., ShiehC.S., HuangY.Y., and TuanR.S.Repair of porcine articular cartilage defect with a biphasic osteochondral composite. J Orthop Res, 25, 1277, 2007.
51.
ReisigG., KreinestM., RichterW., Wagner-EckerM., DinterD., AttenbergerU., Schneider-WaldB., FickertS., and SchwarzM.L.Osteoarthritis in the knee joints of gottingen minipigs after resection of the anterior cruciate ligament? Missing correlation of mri, gene and protein expression with histological scoring. PLoS One, 11, e0165897, 2016.
52.
XiaW., LiuW., CuiL., LiuY., ZhongW., LiuD., WuJ., ChuaK., and CaoY.Tissue engineering of cartilage with the use of chitosan-gelatin complex scaffolds. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater, 71, 373, 2004.
53.
LinkenhokerJ.R., BurkholderT.H., LintonC.G., WaldenA., Abusakran-MondayK.A., RoseroA.P., and FoltzC.J.Effective and safe anesthesia for yorkshire and yucatan swine with and without cardiovascular injury and intervention. J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci, 49, 344, 2010.
54.
EgglestonT.A., RoachW.P., MitchellM.A., SmithK., OlerD., and JohnsonT.E.Comparison of two porcine (sus scrofa domestica) skin models for in vivo near-infrared laser exposure. Comp Med, 50, 391, 2000.
55.
GermscheidN.M., ThorntonG.M., HartD.A., and HildebrandK.A.A biomechanical assessment to evaluate breed differences in normal porcine medial collateral ligaments. J Biomech, 44, 725, 2011.
56.
GotterbarmT., BreuschS.J., SchneiderU., and JungM.The minipig model for experimental chondral and osteochondral defect repair in tissue engineering: retrospective analysis of 180 defects. Lab Anim, 42, 71, 2008.
57.
McKnightL.L., MyrieS.B., MackayD.S., BruntonJ.A., and BertoloR.F.Glucose tolerance is affected by visceral adiposity and sex, but not birth weight, in yucatan miniature pigs. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab, 37, 106, 2012.
58.
KiapourA.M., FlemingB.C., ProffenB.L., and MurrayM.M.Sex influences the biomechanical outcomes of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in a preclinical large animal model. Am J Sports Med, 43, 1623, 2015.
59.
WillemsN.M., MulderL., BankR.A., GrunheidT., den ToonderJ.M., ZentnerA., and LangenbachG.E.Determination of the relationship between collagen cross-links and the bone-tissue stiffness in the porcine mandibular condyle. J Biomech, 44, 1132, 2011.
60.
AmbekarR., ChittendenM., JasiukI., and ToussaintK.C.Jr. Quantitative second-harmonic generation microscopy for imaging porcine cortical bone: comparison to sem and its potential to investigate age-related changes. Bone, 50, 643, 2012.
61.
FengL., ChittendenM., SchirerJ., DickinsonM., and JasiukI.Mechanical properties of porcine femoral cortical bone measured by nanoindentation. J Biomech, 45, 1775, 2012.
62.
RasoulianR., Raeisi NajafiA., ChittendenM., and JasiukI.Reference point indentation study of age-related changes in porcine femoral cortical bone. J Biomech, 46, 1689, 2013.
63.
BaroJ., ShyuP., PangS., JasiukI.M., VivesE., SaljeE.K., and PlanesA.Avalanche criticality during compression of porcine cortical bone of different ages. Phys Rev E, 93, 053001, 2016.
64.
MowV.C., andHuiskesR. , eds. Basic Orthopaedic Biomechanics and Mechano-Biology. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2005.
65.
GannonA.R., NagelT., BellA.P., AveryN.C., and KellyD.J.The changing role of the superficial region in determining the dynamic compressive properties of articular cartilage during postnatal development. Osteoarthritis Cartilage, 23, 975, 2015.
66.
GannonA.R., NagelT., BellA.P., AveryN.C., and KellyD.J.Postnatal changes to the mechanical properties of articular cartilage are driven by the evolution of its collagen network. Eur Cell Mater, 29, 105; discussion 121–103, 2015.
67.
ManzanoS., ArmengolM., PriceA.J., HulleyP.A., GillH.S., DoblareM., and Hamdy DoweidarM.Inhomogeneous response of articular cartilage: a three-dimensional multiphasic heterogeneous study. PLoS One, 11, e0157967, 2016.
68.
PfeiferC., FisherM.B., SaxenaV., KimM., HenningE.A., SteinbergD.R., DodgeG.R., and MauckR.L.Age-dependent subchondral bone remodeling and cartilage repair in a minipig defect model. Tissue Eng Part C, 21, 850, 2017.
69.
FisherM.B., BelkinN.S., MilbyA.H., HenningE.A., SoegaardN., KimM., PfeiferC., SaxenaV., DodgeG.R., BurdickJ.A., SchaerT.P., SteinbergD.R., and MauckR.L.Effects of mesenchymal stem cell and growth factor delivery on cartilage repair in a mini-pig model. Cartilage, 7, 174, 2016.
70.
FisherM.B., BelkinN.S., MilbyA.H., HenningE.A., BostromM., KimM., PfeiferC., MeloniG., DodgeG.R., BurdickJ.A., SchaerT.P., SteinbergD.R., and MauckR.L.Cartilage repair and subchondral bone remodeling in response to focal lesions in a mini-pig model: implications for tissue engineering. Tissue Eng Part A, 21, 850, 2015.
71.
KimI.L., PfeiferC.G., FisherM.B., SaxenaV., MeloniG.R., KwonM.Y., KimM., SteinbergD.R., MauckR.L., and BurdickJ.A.Fibrous scaffolds with varied fiber chemistry and growth factor delivery promote repair in a porcine cartilage defect model. Tissue Eng Part A, 21, 2680, 2015.
72.
PfeiferC.G., KinsellaS.D., MilbyA.H., FisherM.B., BelkinN.S., MauckR.L., and CareyJ.L.Development of a large animal model of osteochondritis dissecans of the knee: a pilot study. Orthop J Sports Med, 3, 2325967115570019, 2015.
73.
ShimomuraK., AndoW., TateishiK., NansaiR., FujieH., HartD.A., KohdaH., KitaK., KanamotoT., MaeT., NakataK., ShinoK., YoshikawaH., and NakamuraN.The influence of skeletal maturity on allogenic synovial mesenchymal stem cell-based repair of cartilage in a large animal model. Biomaterials, 31, 8004, 2010.
74.
FisherM.B., HenningE.A., SoegaardN.B., DodgeG.R., SteinbergD.R., and MauckR.L.Maximizing cartilage formation and integration via a trajectory-based tissue engineering approach. Biomaterials, 35, 2140, 2014.
75.
FujieH., NansaiR., AndoW., ShimomuraK., MoriguchiY., HartD.A., and NakamuraN.Zone-specific integrated cartilage repair using a scaffold-free tissue engineered construct derived from allogenic synovial mesenchymal stem cells: biomechanical and histological assessments. J Biomech, 48, 4101, 2015.
76.
MellorL., HuebnerP., CaiS., Mohiti-AsliM., TaylorM., SpangJ.T., ShirwaikerR.A., and LoboaE.G.Fabrication and evaluation of electrospun, 3d bioplotted, and combination electrospun/3d bioplotted scaffolds for tissue engineering applications. BioMed Res Int, 2017, 6956794, 2017.
77.
ConeS.G., SimpsonS.G., PiedrahitaJ.A., FordhamL.A., SpangJ.T., and FisherM.B. Orientation changes in the cruciate ligamnets of the knee during skeletal growth: a porcine model. J Orthop Res, 2017 [Epub ahead of print]; DOI: 10.1002/jor.23594.
78.
KimH.K., LaorT., ShireN.J., BeanJ.A., and DardzinskiB.J.Anterior and posterior cruciate ligaments at different patient ages: MR imaging findings. Radiology, 247, 826, 2008.
79.
FanH.B., LiuH.F., TohS.L., and GohJ.C.H.Anterior cruciate ligament regeneration using mesenchymal stem cells and silk scaffold in large animal model. Biomaterials, 30, 4967, 2009.
80.
MagarianE.M., FlemingB.C., HarrisonS.L., MastrangeloA.N., BadgerG.J., and MurrayM.M.Delay of 2 or 6 weeks adversely affects the functional outcome of augmented primary repair of the porcine anterior cruciate ligament. Am J Sport Med, 38, 2528, 2010.
81.
LiX., HeJ.K., BianW.G., LiZ., LiD.C., and SnedekerJ.G.A novel silk-tcp-peek construct for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: an off-the shelf alternative to a bone-tendon-bone autograft. Biofabrication, 6, 015010, 2014.
82.
FlemingB.C., SpindlerK.P., PalmerM.P., MagarianE.M., and MurrayM.M.Collagen-platelet composites improve the biomechanical properties of healing anterior cruciate ligament grafts in a porcine model. Am J Sports Med, 37, 1554, 2009.
83.
MurrayM.M., and FlemingB.C.Use of a bioactive scaffold to stimulate anterior cruciate ligament healing also minimizes posttraumatic osteoarthritis after surgery. Am J Sports Med, 41, 1762, 2013.
84.
ProffenB.L., SiekerJ.T., and MurrayM.M.Bio-enhanced repair of the anterior cruciate ligament. Arthroscopy, 31, 990, 2015.
85.
MurrayM.M., MagarianE.M., HarrisonS.L., MastrangeloA.N., ZurakowskiD., and FlemingB.C.The effect of skeletal maturity on functional healing of the anterior cruciate ligament. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 92, 2039, 2010.
86.
MastrangeloA.N., HausB.M., VavkenP., PalmerM.P., MachanJ.T., and MurrayM.M.Immature animals have higher cellular density in the healing anterior cruciate ligament than adolescent or adult animals. J Orthop Res, 28, 1100, 2010.
87.
ChengM., JohnsonV.M., and MurrayM.M.Effects of age and platelet-rich plasma on acl cell viability and collagen gene expression. J Orthop Res, 30, 79, 2012.
88.
VavkenP., SaadF.A., and MurrayM.M.Age dependence of expression of growth factor receptors in porcine acl fibroblasts. J Orthop Res, 28, 1107, 2010.
89.
MurrayM.M., FlutieB.M., KalishL.A., EcklundK., FlemingB.C., ProffenB.L., and MicheliL.J.The bridge-enhanced anterior cruciate ligament repair (bear) procedure: an early feasibility cohort study. Orthop J Sports Med, 4, 2325967116672176, 2016.
90.
SicariB.M., JohnsonS.A., SiuB.F., CrapoP.M., DalyK.A., JiangH., MedberryC.J., TotteyS., TurnerN.J., and BadylakS.F.The effect of source animal age upon the in vivo remodeling characteristics of an extracellular matrix scaffold. Biomaterials, 33, 5524, 2012.
PerruchotM.H., LefaucheurL., BarreauC., CasteillaL., and LouveauI.Age-related changes in the features of porcine adult stem cells isolated from adipose tissue and skeletal muscle. Am J Physiol Cell Physiol, 305, C728, 2013.
93.
AllenK.D., and AthanasiouK.A.Effect of passage and topography on gene expression of temporomandibular joint disc cells. Tissue Eng, 13, 101, 2007.
94.
MorocoJ.R., HintonR., BuschangP., MilamS.B., and IacopinoA.M.Type ii collagen and tgf-betas in developing and aging porcine mandibular condylar cartilage: immunohistochemical studies. Cell Tissue Res, 289, 119, 1997.
95.
SmithM.H., FlanaganC.L., KemppainenJ.M., SackJ.A., ChungH., DasS., HollisterS.J., and FeinbergS.E.Computed tomography-based tissue-engineered scaffolds in craniomaxillofacial surgery. Int J Med Robot, 3, 207, 2007.
96.
SoslowskyL.J., CarpenterJ.E., DeBanoC.M., BanerjiI., and MoalliM.R.Development and use of an animal model for investigations on rotator cuff disease. J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 5, 383, 1996.
97.
PfeiferC.G., FisherM.B., CareyJ.L., and MauckR.L.Impact of guidance documents on translational large animal studies of cartilage repair. Sci Transl Med, 7, 310re319, 2015.
98.
TakeuchiH., NikiY., MatsunariH., UmeyamaK., NagashimaH., EnomotoH., ToyamaY., MatsumotoM., and NakamuraM.Temporal changes in cellular repopulation and collagen fibril remodeling and regeneration after allograft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: an experimental study using kusabira-orange transgenic pigs. Am J Sports Med, 44, 2375, 2016.
99.
SommerJ.R., EstradaJ.L., CollinsE.B., BedellM., AlexanderC.A., YangZ., HughesG., MirB., GilgerB.C., GrobS., WeiX., PiedrahitaJ.A., ShawP.X., PettersR.M., and ZhangK.Production of elovl4 transgenic pigs: a large animal model for stargardt-like macular degeneration. Br J Ophthalmol, 95, 1749, 2011.
100.
GonzalezL.M., WilliamsonI., PiedrahitaJ.A., BlikslagerA.T., and MagnessS.T.Cell lineage identification and stem cell culture in a porcine model for the study of intestinal epithelial regeneration. PLoS One, 8, e66465, 2013.
101.
SperR.B., KohS., ZhangX., SimpsonS., CollinsB., SommerJ., PettersR.M., CaballeroI., PlattJ.L., and PiedrahitaJ.A.Generation of a stable transgenic swine model expressing a porcine histone 2b-egfp fusion protein for cell tracking and chromosome dynamics studies. Plos One, 12, e0169242, 2017.
OnoY., Dávalos HerreraD.A., WoodmassJ.M., BoormanR.S., ThorntonG.M., and LoI.K.Y.Healing rate and clinical outcomes of xenografts appear to be inferior when compared to other graft material in rotator cuff repair: a meta-analysis. J ISAKOS Joint Disord Orthopa Sports Med, 1, 321, 2016.
105.
StoneK.R., Abdel-MotalU.M., WalgenbachA.W., TurekT.J., and GaliliU.Replacement of human anterior cruciate ligaments with pig ligaments: a model for anti-non-gal antibody response in long-term xenotransplantation. Transplantation, 83, 211, 2007.
106.
GuptaA.K., HugK., BoggessB., GaviganM., and TothA.P.Massive or 2-tendon rotator cuff tears in active patients with minimal glenohumeral arthritis clinical and radiographic outcomes of reconstruction using dermal tissue matrix xenograft. Am J Sport Med, 41, 872, 2013.
107.
SheaK.P., ObopilweE., SperlingJ.W., and IannottiJ.P.A biomechanical analysis of gap formation and failure mechanics of a xenograft-reinforced rotator cuff repair in a cadaveric model. J Shoulder Elb Surg, 21, 1072, 2012.
108.
SclambergS.G., TiboneJ.E., ItamuraJ.M., and KasraeianS.Six-month magnetic resonance imaging follow-up of large and massive rotator cuff repairs reinforced with porcine small intestinal submucosa. J Shoulder Elb Surg, 13, 538, 2004.
109.
SkalakR., and FoxC.F., Eds. Tissue Engineering: Proceedings of a Workshop Held at Granlibakken. Lake Tahoe, CA: Alan R. Liss, 1988.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
