Skip to main content

Table 2 Advantages and disadvantages of various in vivo models commonly used in the assessment of biomaterial strategies for cartilage defect repair

From: The benefits and limitations of animal models for translational research in cartilage repair

Species

Advantage

Disadvantage

Mouse

Low cost, manageable easily available

Transgenic and athymic strains available

Can be used in subcutaneous and intramuscular model for degradation rate and safety profile

Very small joints–in situ examination impossible

Rat

Low cost, easily available

Athymic strains available

Maintain in-house

Permanently open growth plates accelerating intrinsic healing

Increased density of cells in cartilage causing more efficient healing

Partial thickness defects impossible

Rabbit

Low cost

Maintain in-house

Increased intrinsic healing due to increased cell density

Very different load characteristics

Consistent partial thickness defects very difficult to achieve

Dog

Naturally occurring disease state

Co-operate with rehabilitation regime

Thin cartilage

Small critical size defect (4 mm)

Complex ethical approval process

Pig

Biochemistry similar to humans

Bone apposition rate and trabecular thickness similar to human

Partial thickness defects possible

Expensive

Difficult to obtain at skeletal maturity

Specialised habitat

Temperament

Goat

Anatomy and biomechanics similar to humans

Partial thickness defects possible

Easily available

Low maintenance

Subchondral cyst formation

Sheep

Anatomy similar to humans

Partial thickness defects possible

Easily available

Low maintenance

Subchondral cyst formation

Horse

Large defects similar to humans

Partial thickness large diameter defects possible

Naturally occurring defects

Similar biomechanics in trochlear groove

Second look arthroscopy possible

Expensive to acquire and maintain – specialised centre required

Cannot avoid weight bearing on the joint during rehab phase if required

Very dense subchondral bone

MRI/CT impossible due to size