Community challenge towards consensus on characterization of biological tissue

C4Bio's first findings

Journal Article (2026)
Author(s)

Nele Famaey (Katholieke Universiteit Leuven)

Yoann Lafon (Univ Claude Bernard Lyon 1)

Ali Akyildiz (Erasmus MC, TU Delft - Medical Instruments & Bio-Inspired Technology)

Silke Dreesen (TU Delft - Medical Instruments & Bio-Inspired Technology, Erasmus MC)

Jean Marc Allain (Institut Polytechnique de Paris, Institut National de Recherche en Informatique et en Automatique (INRIA))

Marta Alloisio (KTH Royal Institute of Technology)

Alejandro Aparici-Gil (Universidad de Zaragoza)

Chiara Catalano (Università degli Studi di Palermo)

Fanette Chassagne (Pontifícia Univ. Católica de Chile)

undefined More Authors (External organisation)

DOI related publication
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2025.113021 Final published version
More Info
expand_more
Publication Year
2026
Language
English
Bibliographical Note
Green Open Access added to TU Delft Institutional Repository 'You share, we take care!' - Taverne project https://www.openaccess.nl/en/publishing/publisher-deals Otherwise as indicated in the copyright section: the publisher is the copyright holder of this work and the author uses the Dutch legislation to make this work public.
Journal title
Journal of Biomechanics
Volume number
194
Article number
113021
Downloads counter
139
Reuse Rights

Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.

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.

Files

1-s2.0-S0021929025005330-main.... (pdf)
(pdf | 8.04 Mb)
- Embargo expired in 18-04-2026
License info not available