Evaluation of cell response to mechanical stimuli at in vitro conditions is known as one of the important issues for modulating cell behavior. Mechanical stimuli, including mechanical vibration and oscillatory fluid flow, act as important biophysical signals for the mechanical modulation of stem cells. In the present study, mesenchymal stem cell (MSC) consists of cytoplasm, nucleus, actin, and microtubule. Also, integrin and primary cilium were considered as mechanoreceptors. In this study, the combined effect of vibration and oscillatory fluid flow on the cell and its components were investigated using numerical modeling. The results of the FEM and FSI model showed that the cell response (stress and strain values) at the frequency of mechanical vibration has the highest value. The achieved results on shear stress caused by the fluid flow on the cell showed that the cell experiences shear stress in the range of . Mechanoreceptors that bind separately to the cell surface, can be highly stimulated by hydrodynamic pressure and, therefore, can play a role in the mechanical modulation of MSCs at in vitro conditions. The results of this research can be effective in future studies to optimize the conditions of mechanical stimuli applied to the cell culture medium and to determine the mechanisms involved in mechanotransduction.
LauELeeWDLiJ, et al. Effect of low-magnitude, high-frequency vibration on osteogenic differentiation of rat mesenchymal stromal cells. J Orthop Res2011; 29(7): 1075–1080.
2.
RowlandsASGeorgePACooper-WhiteJJ.Directing osteogenic and myogenic differentiation of MSCs: interplay of stiffness and adhesive ligand presentation. Am J Physiol Cell Physiol2008; 295(4): C1037–C1044.
3.
SamsonrajRMRaghunathMNurcombeV, et al. Concise review: multifaceted characterization of human mesenchymal stem cells for use in regenerative medicine. Stem Cells Transl Med2017; 6(12): 2173–2185.
4.
HaastersFPrallWCAnzD, et al. Morphological and immunocytochemical characteristics indicate the yield of early progenitors and represent a quality control for human mesenchymal stem cell culturing. J Anat2009; 214(5): 759–767.
5.
BanesAJTsuzakiMYamamotoJ, et al. Mechanoreception at the cellular level: the detection, interpretation, and diversity of responses to mechanical signals. Biochem Cell Biol1995; 73(7-8): 349–365.
6.
LavagninoMArnoczkySTianT, et al. Effect of amplitude and frequency of cyclic tensile strain on the inhibition of MMP-1 mRNA expression in tendon cells: an in vitro study. Connect Tissue Res2003; 44(3): 181–187.
7.
Knothe TateMLKnotheUNiedererP.Experimental elucidation of mechanical load-induced fluid flow and its potential role in bone metabolism and functional adaptation. Am J Med Sci1998; 316(3): 189–195.
8.
VigfúsdóttirÁTPasrijaCThakorePI, et al. Role of pericellular matrix in mesenchymal stem cell deformation during chondrogenic differentiation. Cell Mol Bioeng2010; 3: 387–397.
9.
McBeathRPironeDMNelsonCM, et al. Cell shape, cytoskeletal tension, and RhoA regulate stem cell lineage commitment. Dev Cell2004; 6(4): 483–495.
10.
BirminghamEGroganJANieburGL, et al. Computational modelling of the mechanics of trabecular bone and marrow using fluid structure interaction techniques. Ann Biomed Eng2013; 41(4): 814–826.
KellyDJJacobsCR.The role of mechanical signals in regulating chondrogenesis and osteogenesis of mesenchymal stem cells. Birth Defects Res C Embryo Today2010; 90(1): 75–85.
14.
ChenGXuRZhangC, et al. Responses of MSCs to 3D scaffold matrix mechanical properties under oscillatory perfusion culture. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces2017; 9(2): 1207–1218.
15.
OzciviciELuuYKAdlerB, et al. Mechanical signals as anabolic agents in bone. Nat Rev Rheumatol2010; 6(1): 50–59.
16.
JudexSLeiXHanD, et al. Low-magnitude mechanical signals that stimulate bone formation in the ovariectomized rat are dependent on the applied frequency but not on the strain magnitude. J Biomech2007; 40(6): 1333–1339.
17.
HamiltonDWMaulTMVorpDA.Characterization of the response of bone marrow-derived progenitor cells to cyclic strain: implications for vascular tissue-engineering applications. Tissue Eng2004; 10(3–4): 361–369.
18.
ParkJSChuJSChengC, et al. Differential effects of equiaxial and uniaxial strain on mesenchymal stem cells. Biotechnol Bioeng2004; 88(3): 359–368.
19.
KrekeMHuckleWGoldsteinA.Fluid flow stimulates expression of osteopontin and bone sialoprotein by bone marrow stromal cells in a temporally dependent manner. Bone2005; 36(6): 1047–1055.
20.
StosselTP.On the crawling of animal cells. Science1993; 260(5111): 1086–1094.
21.
WakatsukiTSchwabBThompsonNC, et al. Effects of cytochalasin D and latrunculin B on mechanical properties of cells. J Cell Sci2001; 114(Pt 5): 1025–1036.
22.
RotschCRadmacherM.Drug-induced changes of cytoskeletal structure and mechanics in fibroblasts: an atomic force microscopy study. Biophys J2000; 78(1): 520–535.
23.
ManiotisAJChenCSIngberDE.Demonstration of mechanical connections between integrins, cytoskeletal filaments, and nucleoplasm that stabilize nuclear structure. Proc Natl Acad Sci1997; 94(3): 849–854.
24.
IngberDE.Cellular tensegrity: defining new rules of biological design that govern the cytoskeleton. J Cell Sci1993; 104(3): 613–627.
25.
TummalaPArnsdorfEJJacobsCR.The role of primary cilia in mesenchymal stem cell differentiation: a pivotal switch in guiding lineage commitment. Cell Mol Bioeng2010; 3(3): 207–212.
AndersonEJKnothe TateML.Idealization of pericellular fluid space geometry and dimension results in a profound underprediction of nano-microscale stresses imparted by fluid drag on osteocytes. J Biomech2008; 41(8): 1736–1746.
32.
LiuLYuanWWangJ.Mechanisms for osteogenic differentiation of human mesenchymal stem cells induced by fluid shear stress. Biomech Model Mechanobiol2010; 9(6): 659–670.
33.
HuebschNAranyPRMaoAS, et al. Harnessing traction-mediated manipulation of the cell/matrix interface to control stem-cell fate. Nat Mater2010; 9(6): 518–526.
34.
LeeKLGuevarraMDNguyenAM, et al. The primary cilium functions as a mechanical and calcium signaling nexus. Cilia2015; 4(1): 7–13.
35.
MatthewsBDThodetiCKTytellJD, et al. Ultra-rapid activation of TRPV4 ion channels by mechanical forces applied to cell surface beta1 integrins. Integr Biol2010; 2(9): 435–442.
36.
HaghighipourNHeidarianSShokrgozarMA, et al. Differential effects of cyclic uniaxial stretch on human mesenchymal stem cell into skeletal muscle cell. Cell Biol Int2012; 36(7): 669–675.
37.
Delaine-SmithRReillyG.The effects of mechanical loading on mesenchymal stem cell differentiation and matrix production. Vitam Horm2011; 87: 417–480.
38.
HaaseKMacadangdangJKLEdringtonCH, et al. Extracellular forces cause the nucleus to deform in a highly controlled anisotropic manner. Sci Rep2016; 6(1): 1–11.
39.
HaughMGMurphyCMMcKiernanRC, et al. Crosslinking and mechanical properties significantly influence cell attachment, proliferation, and migration within collagen glycosaminoglycan scaffolds. Tissue Eng Part A2011; 17(9–10): 1201–1208.
40.
LiYJBatraNNYouL, et al. Oscillatory fluid flow affects human marrow stromal cell proliferation and differentiation. J Orthop Res2004; 22(6): 1283–1289.
41.
GerisLLambrechtsTCarlierA, et al. The future is digital: in silico tissue engineering. Curr Opin Biomed Eng2018; 6: 92–98.
42.
ZhuCBaoGWangN.Cell mechanics: mechanical response, cell adhesion, and molecular deformation. Annu Rev Biomed Eng2000; 2(1): 189–226.
43.
GuilakFTedrowJRBurgkartR.Viscoelastic properties of the cell nucleus. Biochem Biophys Res Commun2000; 269(3): 781–786.
44.
CailleNThoumineOTardyY, et al. Contribution of the nucleus to the mechanical properties of endothelial cells. J Biomech2002; 35(2): 177–187.
45.
MaurinBCañadasPBaudrillerH, et al. Mechanical model of cytoskeleton structuration during cell adhesion and spreading. J Biomech2008; 41(9): 2036–2041.
46.
KaverinaIRottnerKSmallJV.Targeting, capture, and stabilization of microtubules at early focal adhesions. J Cell Biol1998; 142(1): 181–190.
47.
McGarryJGPrendergastPJ.A three-dimensional finite element model of an adherent eukaryotic cell. Eur Cell Mater2004; 7: 27–33.
48.
KumarSMaxwellIZHeisterkampA, et al. Viscoelastic retraction of single living stress fibers and its impact on cell shape, cytoskeletal organization, and extracellular matrix mechanics. Biophys J2006; 90(10): 3762–3773.
49.
VaughanTJMullenCAVerbruggenSW, et al. Bone cell mechanosensation of fluid flow stimulation: a fluid-structure interaction model characterising the role integrin attachments and primary cilia. Biomech Model Mechanobiol2015; 14(4): 703–718.
50.
Abbasszadeh RadAVahidiB. A finite elements study on the role of primary cilia in sensing mechanical stimuli to cells by calculating their response to the fluid flow. J Comput Appl Mech2016; 47(1): 35–44.
51.
WangNStamenovićD.Contribution of intermediate filaments to cell stiffness, stiffening, and growth. Am J Physiol Cell Physiol2000; 279(1): C188–C194.
52.
JanmeyPA.The cytoskeleton and cell signaling: component localization and mechanical coupling. Physiol Rev1998; 78(3): 763–781.
53.
KarcherHLammerdingJHuangH, et al. A three-dimensional viscoelastic model for cell deformation with experimental verification. Biophys J2003; 85(5): 3336–3349.
54.
OrMKimmelE.Modeling linear vibration of cell nucleus in low intensity ultrasound field. Ultrasound Med Biol2009; 35(6): 1015–1025.
55.
TanSCPanWXMaG, et al. Viscoelastic behaviour of human mesenchymal stem cells. BMC Cell Biol2008; 9(1): 40–47.
56.
GhaemiRVVahidiBSabourMH, et al. Fluid-structure interactions analysis of shear-induced modulation of a mesenchymal stem cell: an image-based study. Artif Organs2016; 40(3): 278–287.
57.
WangLHsuH-YLiX, et al. Effects of frequency and acceleration amplitude on osteoblast mechanical vibration responses: a finite element study. Biomed Res Int2016; 2016: 1–16.
58.
DarlingEMTopelMZauscherS, et al. Viscoelastic properties of human mesenchymally-derived stem cells and primary osteoblasts, chondrocytes, and adipocytes. J Biomech2008; 41(2): 454–464.
59.
AlihemmatiZVahidiBHaghighipourN, et al. Computational simulation of static/cyclic cell stimulations to investigate mechanical modulation of an individual mesenchymal stem cell using confocal microscopy. Mater Sci Eng C2017; 70: 494–504.
60.
CharrasGTHortonMA.Determination of cellular strains by combined atomic force microscopy and finite element modeling. Biophys J2002; 83(2): 858–879.
61.
RahimpourEVahidiBMollahoseiniZ.A computational simulation of cyclic stretch of an individual stem cell using a nonlinear model. J Tissue Eng Regen Med2019; 13(2): 274–282.
62.
LuLOswaldSJNguH, et al. Mechanical properties of actin stress fibers in living cells. Biophys J2008; 95(12): 6060–6071.
63.
WellsDBAksimentievA.Mechanical properties of a complete microtubule revealed through molecular dynamics simulation. Biophys J2010; 99(2): 629–637.
64.
LinY-CKoenderinkGHMacKintoshFC, et al. Viscoelastic properties of microtubule networks. Macromolecules2007; 40(21): 7714–7720.
65.
BacabacRGSmitTHCowinSC, et al. Dynamic shear stress in parallel-plate flow chambers. J Biomech2005; 38(1): 159–167.
66.
NagarajaMPJoH.The role of mechanical stimulation in recovery of bone loss-high versus low magnitude and frequency of force. Life2014; 4(2): 117–130.
67.
JoukarANiroomand-OscuiiHGhalichiF.Numerical simulation of osteocyte cell in response to directional mechanical loadings and mechanotransduction analysis: considering lacunar–canalicular interstitial fluid flow. Comput Methods Programs Biomed2016; 133: 133–141.
68.
VerbruggenSWVaughanTJMcNamaraLM.Fluid flow in the osteocyte mechanical environment: a fluid-structure interaction approach. Biomech Model Mechanobiol2014; 13(1): 85–97.
69.
VaughanTJHaughMGMcNamaraLM.A fluid–structure interaction model to characterize bone cell stimulation in parallel-plate flow chamber systems. J R Soc Interface2013; 10(81): 20120900.
70.
AhmadianBVahidiBMahdinezhad AsiyabiM.Computational simulation of oscillatory flow on stem cells in a bioreactor. J Braz Soc Mech Sci Eng2023; 45(4): 196.
71.
LauEAl-DujailiSGuentherA, et al. Effect of low-magnitude, high-frequency vibration on osteocytes in the regulation of osteoclasts. Bone2010; 46(6): 1508–1515.
72.
WolchokJCBrokoppCUnderwoodCJ, et al. The effect of bioreactor induced vibrational stimulation on extracellular matrix production from human derived fibroblasts. Biomaterials2009; 30(3): 327–335.
73.
ChenDFDuHLiWH.A 3D paired microelectrode array for accumulation and separation of microparticles. J Micromech Microeng2006; 16(7): 1162–1169.
74.
KohlesSSNèveNZimmermanJD, et al. Mechanical stress analysis of microfluidic environments designed for isolated biological cell investigations. J Biomech Eng2009; 131: 121006.
75.
WangCBakerBMChenCS, et al. Endothelial cell sensing of flow direction. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol2013; 33(9): 2130–2136.
76.
MilnerJSGrolMWBeaucageKL, et al. Finite-element modeling of viscoelastic cells during high-frequency cyclic strain. J Funct Biomater2012; 3(1): 209–224.
77.
GrenierGRémy-ZolghadriMLaroucheD, et al. Tissue reorganization in response to mechanical load increases functionality. Tissue Eng2005; 11(1–2): 90–100.
LimCTZhouEHQuekST.Mechanical models for living cells--a review. J Biomech2006; 39(2): 195–216.
80.
CorriganMAJohnsonGPStavenschiE, et al. TRPV4-mediates oscillatory fluid shear mechanotransduction in mesenchymal stem cells in part via the primary cilium. Sci Rep2018; 8(1): 3824.
DownsMENguyenAMHerzogFA, et al. An experimental and computational analysis of primary cilia deflection under fluid flow. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Eng2014; 17(1): 2–10.
83.
Abbasszadeh RadAVahidiB. The effect of the kind of attachment of primary cilium to cell in its response to the fluid flow: a 3D computational simulation. J Solid Fluid Mech2018; 8(1): 203–213.
84.
OlivaresALMarsal PlanellJA, et al. Finite element study of scaffold architecture design and culture conditions for tissue engineering. Biomaterials2009; 30(30): 6142–6149.
85.
YourekGMcCormickSMMaoJJ, et al. Shear stress induces osteogenic differentiation of human mesenchymal stem cells. Regen Med2010; 5(5): 713–724.
86.
CaseNSenBThomasJA, et al. Steady and oscillatory fluid flows produce a similar osteogenic phenotype. Calcif Tissue Int2011; 88(3): 189–197.
87.
ArnsdorfEJTummalaPKwonRY, et al. Mechanically induced osteogenic differentiation--the role of RhoA, ROCKII and cytoskeletal dynamics. J Cell Sci2009; 122(Pt 4): 546–553.
88.
OwanIBurrDBTurnerCH, et al. Mechanotransduction in bone: osteoblasts are more responsive to fluid forces than mechanical strain. Am J Physiol Cell Physiol1997; 273(3): C810–C815.
