In a CPA-loading protocol, steps must be designed to minimize the exposure time at each temperature. Therefore, knowledge of CPA diffusion in cartilage, by measurement BI 2536 price or by calculation, is required for the design of effective and efficient CPA-loading protocols. However, modeling efforts for predicting CPA diffusion in tissues such as articular cartilage have been few and limited until recently. Muldrew et al. used Fick’s law to calculate the
diffusion coefficient of the Me2SO in cartilage for further predicting the overall Me2SO uptake in cartilage over time . Maxwell–Stefan transport equations were used by Xu and Cui (2003) in modeling the co-transport of multiple solutes in a porous media for applications in tissues such as cartilage  – Maxwell–Stefan equations are a more sophisticated set of equations from which Fick’s law can be derived using some simplifying assumptions including an ideal-dilute assumption for solutes. Two different studies
were published in 2008 by Zhang and Pegg  and Mukherjee et al.  on modeling CPA diffusion in cartilage. Mukherjee et al. used Fick’s law of diffusion to predict the spatial and temporal distribution of the CPA in cartilage. That information was Dabrafenib order further used to design hypothetical stepwise cooling protocols and predict the chondrocyte volume response to CPA loading. Lawson et al. used the same approach to simulate stepwise loading and removal of CPA from tissues . These predictions are of high practical importance for designing and optimizing liquidus-tracking or stepwise loading-cooling steps. Whether or not Fick’s law is capable of making accurate predictions is another important question. To answer this question, Zhang and Pegg  utilized the triphasic model of cartilage by Lai et Uroporphyrinogen III synthase al. , developed in the biomechanical engineering field, to describe the movement of the CPA in cartilage. As novel as the
study by Zhang and Pegg was, some of the assumptions were insufficient for the specific case of vitrification solutions, and basically reduced the model to Fick’s law. For example, the assumption of ideal and dilute solutions for vitrifying concentrations of the CPA was insufficient. Also, osmotic movement of the interstitial fluid was ignored in the analysis. In addition, in part due to lack of appropriate data, no values were reported for the transport parameters of the model other than the diffusion coefficient of the CPA. Therefore, the final conclusion of the study was that there were no essential differences between the biomechanical model and Fick’s law in calculating transport in cartilage. Abazari et al.