Back

Modelling and Investigating the Interactive Role of Fluid Velocity and Pore Pressure in Load-Induced Osteogenesis

Shekhar, H.; Prasad, J.

2025-10-26 bioengineering
10.1101/2025.09.22.677695 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Current models propose that osteogenesis occurs in regions of high mechanical stimuli such as strain, fluid velocity, or pore pressure. However, in vivo experiments on mouse tibiae under cantilever loading revealed new bone formation exclusively on the anterolateral side, despite the opposite posteromedial surface experiencing comparable magnitudes of these stimuli. This indicates that individual stimulus magnitude is insufficient and suggests an interactive mechanism among them. To investigate this, a poroelastic finite element model was developed to quantify the combined effects of load-induced fluid velocity and pore pressure. Tensile loading generated negative pore pressure, stretching osteocyte processes, while compressive loading produced positive pore pressure, compressing them. Since fluid flow exerts drag forces that also stretch osteocytes, the combined effect of flow and negative pressure on the tensile side was hypothesized to enhance mechanotransduction and trigger osteogenesis. Four potential stimuli were evaluated: dissipation energy density arising from (i) pore pressure, (ii) fluid velocity, (iii) their non-interactive sum, and (iv) their interaction. Comparison with in vivo data showed that only the interactive dissipation energy density accurately predicted both the spatial pattern and rate of new bone formation under high, low, and rest-inserted loading regimes. These results establish that the interaction between fluid velocity and pore pressure, rather than their independent contributions, governs load-induced osteogenesis. The proposed framework advances the mechanistic understanding of bone adaptation and offers a predictive basis for optimizing mechanical and clinical interventions to promote bone formation and mitigate bone loss.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Biomechanics and Modeling in Mechanobiology
25 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
28.0%
2
Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials
22 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
18.8%
3
Acta Biomaterialia
85 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.4%
50% of probability mass above
4
Journal of The Royal Society Interface
189 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
4.0%
5
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 8%
4.0%
6
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 30%
4.0%
7
Journal of Biomechanics
57 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.0%
8
Journal of Biomechanical Engineering
17 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.6%
9
Annals of Biomedical Engineering
34 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
3.6%
10
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
88 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
2.9%
11
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 48%
2.1%
12
Bone
22 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.1%
13
Royal Society Open Science
193 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.5%
14
Advanced Science
249 papers in training set
Top 14%
1.2%
15
Frontiers in Physiology
93 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.8%
16
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 59%
0.7%
17
International Journal for Numerical Methods in Biomedical Engineering
12 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.7%
18
JBMR Plus
16 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.7%
19
Journal of Orthopaedic Research
19 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.5%
20
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 67%
0.5%
21
Journal of Experimental Biology
249 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.5%
22
BioSystems
11 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.5%