METHOD FOR GENERATING AND CONTROLLING COMPLEX STRAIN PATTERNS ON BIOLOGICAL MATERIALS, MAGNETOMECHANICAL STIMULATION SYSTEM FOR GENERATING COMPLEX STRAIN PATTERNS IN BIOLOGICAL MATERIALS

Abstract

Method for generating and controlling complex strain patterns on biological materials comprising the steps of providing a magnetic stimulation device and a magneto-responsive substrate; culturing biological material in the substrate; determining the position of the magnetic stimulation device for obtaining a defined strain pattern on the biological material; placing the magnets in the position determined; and activating a magnetic stimulation device to generate a complex strain pattern in the magneto-responsive substrate and consequently in the biological material; and magneto-mechanical stimulation system comprising a magneto-responsive substrate configured to hold biological material; a holder for placing the magneto-responsive substrate; a magnetic stimulation device configured to generate a complex strain pattern on the biological material by generating a magnetic field which acts over the magneto-responsive substrate; a computing module; an imaging module for long-term monitoring; and an interface module for performing the steps of the method.

Claims

1. Method for generating and controlling mechanical stiffness and/or complex strain patterns on biological materials (3) comprising the steps of: providing a magnetic stimulation device (1); providing a magneto-responsive substrate (2); culturing biological material (3) in the magneto-responsive substrate (2); determining the position of magnets (4) of the magnetic stimulation device (1) for obtaining a defined strain pattern on the biological material (3); placing the magnets (4) in the position determined by means of at least one motor (5) of the magnetic stimulation device (1); activating a magnetic stimulation device (1) to generate a complex strain pattern in the magneto-responsive substrate (2) and consequently in the biological material (3).

2. Method according to claim 1, wherein the step of determining the position of magnets (4) of the magnetic stimulation device (1) is performed by simulating the magnetic field obtained as a function of the magnets' (4) position, by using finite element simulations or machine learning algorithms fed by a comprehensive experimental characterization of several magneto-active samples.

3. Method according to claim 2, further comprising the steps of characterizing a magneto-mechanical response of the substrate (2) macroscopically, by using a magneto-mechanical rheometer under uniaxial compression and shear deformation modes, and microscopically, by conducting nanoindentation tests at different rate conditions and using said characterization to simulate the strain pattern generated by the magnetic field obtained.

4. Method according to claim 3, wherein in the step of using said characterization to simulate the strain pattern generated: fixed boundary conditions are imposed, such that the substrate (2) presents a nonlinear mechanical behavior and suffers a variation in apparent material stiffness; or free boundary conditions are imposed, such that the substrate (2) mechanically deforms.

5. Method according to claim 3, further comprising the steps of determining a new position of magnets (4) of the magnetic stimulation device (1) for obtaining a modified strain pattern on the biological material (3), once the strain pattern generated is obtained for controlling said strain pattern on the fly and moving the magnets (4) of the magnetic stimulation device (1) to the new position determined.

6. Magneto-mechanical stimulation system for generating complex strain patterns in biological materials (3) comprising: a magneto-responsive substrate (2) comprising a polymeric matrix and a plurality of micron-size magnetic particles configured to hold biological material (3); a holder (6) for placing the magneto-responsive substrate (2); a magnetic stimulation device (1) comprising at least one motor (5) and at 2least two magnets (4) placed on the holder (6) around the magneto-responsive substrate (2) and configured to generate a complex strain pattern on the biological material (3) by generating a magnetic field which acts over the magneto-responsive substrate (2), wherein the at least one motor (5) is connected to the magnets (4) to displace them; a computing module (7) to determine the position of the magnets (4) for controlling the magnetic field generated; an imaging module (8) for measuring the shape of the biological material (3) under the magnetic field generated; and an interface module for imposing magneto-mechanical dynamic conditions on the computing module (7) by using the measurements obtained from the imaging module (8).

7. Stimulation system according to claim 6, wherein the magneto-responsive substrate (2) is a magnetorheological elastomer (MRE).

8. Stimulation system according to claim 6, wherein the polymeric matrix is made of a magneto-active hydrogel or Dowsil CY52-276 (PDMS), and is filled with micron-size magnetic particles of carbonyl iron powder.

9. Stimulation system according to claim 6, wherein the surface in contact with the cultured cellular system is covered with a collagen coating.

10. Stimulation system according to claim 6, wherein the magnetic stimulation device (1) comprises four independently controllable sets of permanent magnets (4) surrounding the substrate (2), with two sets aligned along an axis, forming two axes which lie orthogonal to control the field in each direction, and a rotation mechanism to allow an azimuthal rotation.

11. Stimulation system according to claim 6, wherein the interface module comprises a 3D finite element module or artificial intelligence algorithms for controlling and predicting the deformation patterns transmitted to the cells during the application of the magnetic field.

12. Stimulation system according to claim 6, further comprising a magneto-mechanical rheometer and/or a nanoindentation system to characterize macroscopically and/or microscopically the substrate (2).

13. Stimulation system according to claim 6, wherein the holder (6) and the imaging module (8) are comprised by an incubator (6).

14. A computer program adapted to perform the steps of the method of any of claims 1 to 5 by using the computing module (7) of the stimulation system of any of claims 7 to 13.

15. A computer readable storage medium comprising the computer program of claim 14.

1. A method for generating and controlling mechanical stiffness and/or complex strain patterns on biological materials comprising the steps of: providing a magnetic stimulation device which comprises at least two magnets and at least one motor connected to the magnets; providing a magneto-responsive substrate; culturing biological material in the magneto-responsive substrate; determining the position of the magnets of the magnetic stimulation device for obtaining a defined strain pattern on the biological material; placing the magnets in the position determined using the at least one motor of the magnetic stimulation device; activating the magnetic stimulation device to generate a complex strain pattern in the magneto-responsive substrate and consequently in the biological material cultured in said magneto-responsive substrate.

2. The method according to claim 1, wherein the step of determining the position of the magnets of the magnetic stimulation device performed by simulating a magnetic field generated by the magnets and obtained as a function of the magnets' position, by using finite element simulations or machine learning algorithms fed by a comprehensive experimental characterization of multiple magneto-active samples.

3. The method according to claim 2, further comprising the steps of characterizing a magneto-mechanical response of the substrate: macroscopically, by using a magneto-mechanical rheometer under uniaxial compression and shear deformation modes, and microscopically, by conducting nanoindentation tests at different rate conditions, and using said characterization to simulate the strain pattern generated by the magnetic field generated by the magnets.

4. The method according to claim 3, wherein in the step of using said characterization to simulate the strain pattern generated: fixed boundary conditions are imposed, the substrate, thus, presenting a nonlinear mechanical behavior and suffering a variation in apparent material stiffness; or free boundary conditions are imposed, the substrate, thus, mechanically deforming.

5. The method according to claim 3, further comprising the steps of: determining a new position of the magnets of the magnetic stimulation device for obtaining a modified strain pattern on the biological material, once the strain pattern generated is obtained, for controlling said strain pattern on the fly and moving the magnets of the magnetic stimulation device to the new position determined.

6. A magneto-mechanical stimulation system for generating complex strain patterns in biological materials comprising: a magneto-responsive substrate comprising a polymeric matrix and a plurality of micron-size magnetic particles and configured to hold biological material; a holder for placing the magneto-responsive substrate; a magnetic stimulation device, comprising at least one motor and at least two magnets, placed on the holder close to the magneto-responsive substrate and configured to generate a complex strain pattern on the biological material by generating a magnetic field which acts over the magneto-responsive substrate, wherein the at least one motor is connected to the magnets to displace them; a computing module to determine the position of the magnets for controlling the magnetic field generated; an imaging module for measuring a shape of the biological material under the magnetic field generated; and an interface module for imposing magneto-mechanical dynamic conditions on the computing module by using the measurements obtained from the imaging module.

7. The magneto-mechanical stimulation system according to claim 6, wherein the magneto-responsive substrate is a magnetorheological elastomer (MRE).

8. The magneto-mechanical stimulation system according to claim 6, wherein the polymeric matrix is made of a magneto-active hydrogel or Dowsil CY52-276 (PDMS), and is filled with micron-size magnetic particles of carbonyl iron powder.

9. The magneto-mechanical stimulation system according to claim 6, wherein a surface of the magneto-responsive substrate, being in contact with the biological material is covered with a collagen coating.

10. The magneto-mechanical stimulation system according to claim 6, wherein the magnetic stimulation device comprises four independently controllable sets of permanent magnets surrounding the substrate, with two sets aligned along an axis, forming two orthogonal axes to control the magnetic field in each direction, and a rotation mechanism to allow an azimuthal rotation.

11. The magneto-mechanical stimulation system according to claim 6, wherein the interface module comprises a 3D finite element module or artificial intelligence algorithms for controlling and predicting deformation patterns transmitted to the biological material during the application of the magnetic field.

12. The magneto-mechanical stimulation system according to claim 6, further comprising a magneto-mechanical rheometer and/or a nanoindentation system to characterize macroscopically and/or microscopically the magneto-responsive substrate.

13. The magneto-mechanical stimulation system according to claim 6, further comprising an incubator, which houses the holder and the imaging module.

14. (canceled)

15. (canceled)

Description

DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0061] FIG. 1. Shows an exemplary embodiment of the stimulation system of the invention within an incubator placed in a microscope.

[0062] FIG. 2. Shows a method for generating and controlling complex strain patterns on biological materials.

[0063] FIG. 3. Shows the characterization of a potential substrate under uniaxial compression loading, using a magneto-mechanical rheometer, by representing the storage Young's modulus depending on the mixing ratio used for the substrate and on the magnetic field applied.

[0064] FIG. 4. Shows the characterization of the substrate under shear loading, using a magneto-mechanical rheometer, representing the storage shear modulus depending on the mixing ratio used for the substrate and on the magnetic field applied.

[0065] FIG. 5. Shows the results of the quasi-static nanoindentation test, by representing the Young's modulus depending on the mixing ratio used for the substrate.

[0066] FIG. 6. Shows the relaxation response depending on the mixing ratio used for the substrate, representing the load versus time relaxation curves conducted by nanoindentation.

[0067] FIG. 7. Shows a comparison of the multifunctional response to the complex strain patterns between experimental data and computational predictions by means of displacement fields, for an approach of 2 magnets and for two different magneto-active substrates.

[0068] FIG. 8. Shows a comparison of the multifunctional response to the complex strain patterns between experimental data and computational predictions by means of displacement fields, for an approach of 4 magnets and for two different magneto-active substrates.

[0069] FIG. 9. Shows experimental results obtained from digital image correlation of local mechanical deformation within different magneto-active substrates and for an approach of 2 magnets.

[0070] FIG. 10. Shows experimental results obtained from digital image correlation of local mechanical deformation within different magneto-active substrates and for an approach of 4 magnets.

[0071] FIG. 11. Shows a proof of concept to evaluate the versatility of the system to simulate complex heterogeneous strain distributions by showing: row A) an in vivo strain distribution within an axial view of a human volunteer brain tissue subjected to an abrupt neck rotation, at different impact stages, row B) the detail of local strain distributions of the region indicated in row A, and row C) the experimental strain distribution computed by digital image correlation and plotted on the undeformed configuration of the magneto-active substrate.

[0072] FIG. 12. Shows a distribution of the strain magnitude and principal traction forces on the contact surface between the multifunctional substrate and the biological material when subjected to the action of two and four permanent magnets, respectively.

[0073] FIG. 13. Shows the polarization dynamics in the 3 regions showed in FIG. 12, where a polar distribution of cell orientation is shown before and after stimulation.

[0074] FIG. 14. Shows a scheme of one possible manufacturing process of the magneto-active substrate.

PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS OF THE INVENTION

[0075] The invention relates to a magneto-mechanical stimulation system for non-invasive and real-time generation and control of complex strain patterns within biological materials (3).

[0076] FIG. 1 shows an exemplary embodiment of the stimulation system of the invention. The system of FIG. 1 comprises a non-ferromagnetic incubator (6) system designed to hold a magneto-responsive substrate (2). Biological material (3) is cultured on the substrate (2) so that the strain pattern generated on the substrate (2) is transferred to the cultured biological material (3). Preferably, a collagen coating is added on the surface of the substrate (2) wherein the biological material (3) is cultured.

[0077] The magneto-responsive substrate (2) comprises a polymeric matrix and a plurality of micron-size magnetic particles. More particularly, in this case, the polymeric matrix is a soft elastomer with a plurality of magnetic particles, i.e., a magnetorheological elastomer (MRE).

[0078] The system also comprises a magnetic stimulation device (1) which comprises in this case four magnets (4) placed on the incubator (6) around the magneto-responsive substrate (2) and configured to generate a magnetic field which acts over the magneto-responsive substrate (2). The magnetic stimulation device (1) also comprises four motors (5) connected each one to one of the magnets (4) to displace them.

[0079] Also, the system comprises an imaging module (8), which in this case is an upright fluorescence microscope (with ceramic objectives) for measuring the shape of the biological material (3) under the magnetic field generated by the magnetic stimulation device (1).

[0080] As a second alternative, a multi-compartment MRE can be used manufacturing its central region without magnetic particles. This central transparent region allows for phase contrast imaging on any upright or inverse microscope, making possible to record the cellular dynamics along the whole temporal event.

[0081] As a third alternative, a magneto-active hydrogel can be used combining a hydrogel matrix (or ferrogel) with micron- or nano-size magnetic particles embedded in it. This allows culturing biological material (3) within the active substrate (2), allowing for three-dimensional in-vitro tests.

[0082] The system further comprises a computing module (7) to determine the position of the magnets (4) for controlling the magnetic field generated. Said computing module (7) uses a 3D finite element module for performing computational simulations, thus, obtaining the permanent magnets' (4) relative positions to generate a given magnitude and direction of the magnetic field within the magneto-active substrate (2). The target magnetic field is estimated by multi-physical computational modelling to induce deformation patterns within the magneto-active substrate (2) to be transmitted to the biological system cultured.

[0083] As a second alternative for the computing module (7), artificial intelligence algorithms may be used for in situ design of experimental conditions, which can be changed along with the assay on demand. The algorithms take information from a database with experimental data providing local strain distributions as a function of the substrate (2) used and the permanent magnets' (4) positions.

[0084] FIG. 2 shows the steps of a method for generating and controlling complex strain patterns on biological materials (3). The method presented comprises a step of providing a magnetic stimulation device (1) and a magneto-responsive substrate (2). Then, biological material (3) is cultured on the magneto-responsive substrate (2).

[0085] The position of the magnets (4) of the magnetic stimulation device (1) is determined for obtaining a defined strain pattern on the biological material (3). In this step, simulations are carried out (or, alternatively, the artificial intelligent algorithms are used) for determining the magnets (4) position by determining the magnetic field generated as a function of the magnets' (4) position.

[0086] Also, the strain pattern generated on the substrate (2) by the magnetic field is simulated by introducing the magneto-mechanical response of the substrate (2) as an input of said simulations. For obtaining said magneto-mechanical response, a characterization of the substrate (2) is performed, both, macroscopically, by using a magneto-mechanical rheometer under uniaxial compression and shear deformation modes, and microscopically, by conducting nanoindentation tests at different rate conditions.

[0087] The method, then, comprises the steps of placing the magnets (4) in the position determined by means of the motors (5) of the magnetic stimulation device (1) and activating the magnetic stimulation device (1) to generate a complex strain pattern in the magneto-responsive substrate (2) and consequently in the biological material (3).

[0088] Also, the method can further comprise the steps of determining a new position of magnets (4) of the magnetic stimulation device (1) for obtaining a modified strain pattern on the biological material (3). In this way the strain pattern previously generated can be controlled on the fly by moving the magnets (4) of the magnetic stimulation device (1) to the new position determined.

[0089] In this example, the magneto-mechanical response of the substrate (2) is characterized accounting for twelve different combinations of the polymeric mixing ratio (i.e., matrix stiffness) and particles' volume fraction. A priori, softer polymeric matrices and higher particles' content lead to higher magnetorheological effects (i.e., mechanical deformation under magnetic fields and/or stiffness changes).

[0090] The magnetic problem must be solved macroscopically as it depends on the nature (i.e., permanent magnet, coil) and location of the magnetic sources as well as on the nature (i.e., material properties, geometry) and location of the substrate (2). The macroscopic response of the substrate (2) is thus governed by a strong structural component.

[0091] To evaluate such a macrostructural response, experiments in a magneto-mechanical rheometer are performed. These experiments allow for testing the substrates (2) under uniaxial compression and shear deformation modes in a wide range of magnetic field conditions.

[0092] An example of the magneto-mechanical characterization at the macroscale, by using a rheometer at quasi-static conditions and for specific magneto-active substrates (2), is shown in FIGS. 3 and 4. FIG. 3 shows the characterization under uniaxial compression loading, by representing the storage Young's modulus on the magnetic field applied for different magneto-active substrates (2) (using same polymeric matrix at different mixing ratios). FIG. 4 shows the characterization under shear loading, representing the storage shear modulus depending on the magnetic field applied for different magneto-active substrates (2) (using same polymeric matrix at different mixing ratios).

[0093] Also, it must be noted that the biological material (3) cultured on the magneto-active substrate (2) consists of individuals with a characteristic length in the range of microns. Therefore, the stiffness, forces and deformations transmitted to the cells are related to local micron-size responses.

[0094] The microstructural response is evaluated by conducting nanoindentation tests at different rate conditions. The results are shown in FIGS. 5 and 6. The results of the quasi-static nanoindentation tests are shown in FIG. 5, by representing the Young's modulus for different magneto-active substrates (2) (using same polymeric matrix at different mixing ratios).

[0095] FIG. 6 shows the relaxation response depending on the mixing ratio used for the substrate (2), representing the load versus time relaxation curves.

[0096] Note that the microscopic measurements are taken on the polymeric phase and the values measured did not show significant changes when varying the particles' content or applying external magnetic fields.

[0097] In this regard, when subjected to an axial magnetic field, the magneto-active substrates (2) experienced a significant increase in stiffness that is stronger in compression than in shear loading. This effect is explained by the application of the magnetic field along the axial direction during compression loading, leading to the structural, macroscopic, response of the magneto-active substrate (2) to govern its behavior. Under shear loading the magnetic fields play a lower role on the substrate's (2) mechanical performance.

[0098] The macroscopic, i.e., rheological, experiments showed a magnetorheological effect (i.e., increase in stiffness) of up to 1.7 times for 50 mT and 9.3 times for 200 mT. Note that this stiffening refers to a macrostructural effect and does not imply microstructural stiffening of the polymeric matrix. The nanoindentation tests provided a local stiffness ranging from 4.1 to 14.6 kPa depending on the mixing ratio, and a characteristic relaxation time in the order of ˜0.5-1.0 s.

[0099] Another important fact is that the collagen coating is found to play a negligible role in material stiffness at both macro and microstructural responses. This fact indicates that coating does not significantly affect the transmitted forces from the substrate (2) to the biological matter. The relaxation times of MREs with higher particles' content, at the macroscopic scale, were measured reporting a significant increase up to ˜10 s.

[0100] From the results provided in FIGS. 3, 4, 5 and 6, it is inferred a promising magnetostrictive response of the active substrates (2) (i.e., mechanical deformation under an external magnetic field), but a slight increase in microstructural stiffness (i.e., stiffening of the polymeric phase) due to low strain-hardening (low nonlinear response).

[0101] For biomechanical stimulation, an evaluation at a microscale level (i.e., cell characteristic length) is needed. To assess the micro-magnetorheological effect, a nanoindentation system is coupled to the magnetic-stimulation device (1). This allows for measuring changes in stiffness due to the application of an external magnetic field.

[0102] The nanoindentation results within the central region showed negligible stiffness changes due to the external magnetic fields (as expected owing to the low strain-hardening of the polymeric matrix), as shown in FIGS. 5 and 6.

[0103] The step of using the characterization of the substrate (2) to simulate the strain pattern generated, could be performed imposing fixed boundary conditions, such that the substrate (2) presents a nonlinear mechanical behavior and suffers a variation in apparent material stiffness. Alternatively, said step could be performed imposing free boundary conditions, such that the substrate (2) mechanically deforms.

[0104] In this latter case, the mechanical deformation of the MRE due to the applied magnetic field can be evaluated.

[0105] FIG. 7 shows the effects of magnetic fields applied on MRE samples by means of magnetic stimulation. In particular, FIG. 7 shows a comparison between experimental data and computational predictions by means of displacement fields, for an approach of two magnets (4) and for two different mixing ratios of the polymeric matrix (6:5 and 1:1). FIG. 8 shows the same comparison for an approach of four magnets (4).

[0106] FIGS. 9 and 10 show experimental results obtained from digital image correlation of local mechanical deformation within MREs with different polymeric matrices and two different magnetic conditions (i.e., approach of two and four magnets (4)).

[0107] All these experiments showed significant mechanical deformations within the magneto-active substrate (2), as shown in FIGS. 9 and 10. In this case, Digital Image Correlation (DIC) was used to compute local deformation values. The plots shown in FIG. 10 present the magnitude of the local deformations and principal strain lines to indicate the effective force direction that the cells sense.

[0108] In this regard, the magnetic-stimulation system can introduce deformation patterns in different directions of up to >30%.

[0109] Microstructural and macrostructural experimental and computational data shows that the deformations develop as stretching along the main field direction. When the permanent magnets (4) approach the MRE, the magnetic particles start to magnetize leading to three main magneto-mechanical couplings: [0110] i) dipole-dipole interaction between particles that result in attraction forces; [0111] ii) paramagnetic torques that lead to the formation of chain-like particles distributions and their reorientation along the external magnetic field; and [0112] iii) a strong attraction force between the particles and the magnet (4) itself.

[0113] The extremely soft nature of the polymeric matrix facilitates the rearrangement of particles favoring the latter mechanisms and, therefore, the resulting expansion of the substrate (2) towards the permanent magnet's location.

[0114] Table 1 shows the experimental results for an specific magneto-active substrate (2), thus, providing the stiffness and deformation ranges that can be reached with the magnetic stimulation system as a function of the manufacturing conditions of the substrate (2).

[0115] This table presents MRE samples' macroscopic and microscopic mechanical stiffnesses with different manufacturing parameters: the magnetic particles' volume fraction and polymeric mixing ratio. These mechanical properties are given for different magnetic conditions and are referred to as: i) macroscopic stiffness: shear modulus measured from magneto-rheological testing; ii) microscopic stiffness: Young's modulus obtained from nanoindentation with and without the presence of different sets of permanent magnets (4).

[0116] In addition, this table summarizes the local mechanical deformations within the MRE region occupied by cells when using the stimulation system.

TABLE-US-00001 TABLE 1 Multifunctional response of MRE samples Particles' Magnetic volume Polymeric mixing ratio conditions fraction 6:5 1:1 9:10 5:6 Macroscopic  0 mT 15% 0.4 1.5 2.9 3.2 stiffness 30% 0.6 2.7 4.6 5.8 (shear 50 mT 15% 0.7 1.8 3.2 3.4 modulus) [kPa] 30% 1.0 2.8 5.0 6.2 Microscopic Independent Independent 4.1 8.4 12.3 14.6 stiffness 0-50 mT 0-30% (Young's modulus) [kPa] Local 2 magnets 15% 14.3 4.0 1.7 1.2 deformation 30% 21.4 8.5 1.8 1.2 at MRE 4 magnets 15% 16.4 3.4 1.4 1.1 center [%] 30% 24.8 13.3 1.5 1.0

[0117] The system has been tested to reproduce brain strain patterns during closed head impact, one of the most complex mechanical scenarios as strain distributions evolve leading to complex non-symmetric strain distributions.

[0118] To this end, in vivo mechanical deformations of the brain tissue when subjected to a head impact scenario (neck abrupt rotation) has been obtained from literature (being limited to low strains to avoid volunteer injury). FIG. 11 shows a proof of concept to evaluate the versatility of the system to simulate complex heterogeneous strain distributions.

[0119] The row A of FIG. 11 shows an in vivo strain distribution within an axial view of a human volunteer brain tissue subjected to an abrupt neck rotation, at different impact (deformation) stages.

[0120] Row B of FIG. 11 shows the detail of local strain distributions of the region indicated in row A with a circle.

[0121] Row C of FIG. 11 shows the experimental strain distribution computed by digital image correlation and plotted on the undeformed configuration of the MRE substrates (2). It has to be noted that the experiments on the MREs represented in row C aim at reproducing the in vivo strain patterns but with an amplification of ten times their magnitude to reach strain values above injury thresholds in traumatic brain injury (≈21%).

[0122] Note that this adds complexity as it requires larger nonlinear deformation patterns. To do so, firstly, it is identified the relative positions of the magnets (4) that produce such targeted local heterogeneous strains fields, by running a complete set of computational simulations that provide strain measurements in local points of the MRE substrate (2), as explained before.

[0123] These local strains are compared with local measurements from the experimental data to find the solution that better reproduces the in vivo scenario. Then, the obtained magnets (4) positions are experimentally evaluated to validate the approach.

[0124] All in all, the magneto-mechanical system can reproduce heterogeneous strain distributions close to the real-brain ones, while allowing for amplifying their magnitude by ten times (thus approaching strain thresholds leading to injury). The experimental strains are represented on the undeformed configuration by means of Green-Lagrange strain, to provide a fair comparison with the in vivo experimental data.

[0125] A set of in vitro assays on cellular alignment of human dermal fibroblasts (hFBs) due to mechanical stimulation is included to demonstrate the ability of the system defined to transmit mechanical forces to biological material (3), i.e. cellular systems.

[0126] hFBs are particularly interesting as they play an essential role in the development and repair of tissues. Some state-of-the-art works are focused on analyzing the orientation of hFBs responding to mechanical stimulation (cyclic biaxial). These orientation or polarization processes are of high interest in mechanobiology.

[0127] Nevertheless, the published studies rarely alternate different mechanical deformation modes within the same assay and are usually limited to either uniaxial or biaxial loading. However, during pathophysiological conditions such as acute injuries, heterogeneous tissue stiffening is associated with changes in the ECM composition. These changes disrupt the mechanical homeostasis that underlies healthy tissue architecture and function, leading to alterations in the cell-generated forces and cellular mechanical properties.

[0128] Therefore, subsequent changes in the substrate (2) result in heterogeneous strain patterns and temporal-varying interaction forces that affect cellular organization and behavior. In this regard, the resultant cell polarization plays a relevant role in different processes such as collective migration, where a homogeneous orientation of the individuals facilitates mechanical propulsion forces and better intercellular communication.

[0129] The response of primary dermal hFBs, cultured on soft MREs (0.6 kPa shear stiffness), to heterogeneous strain distributions is evaluated. To this end, hFBs are cultured on the MRE substrates (2).

[0130] Then, the cellular system is subjected to different magneto-mechanical conditions, which correspond to the main cases studied, i.e., two and four sets of permanent magnets (4). Although heterogeneous strain patterns are reached in both cases, the two-magnets (4) scenario approaches to uniaxial loading and the four-magnets (4) scenario approaches to biaxial loading.

[0131] All these tests were analyzed associating cellular polarization with local mechanical conditions and evaluating cell viability. Local cell analyses were conducted on MRE regions, shown in FIG. 12, with radial distances from the center below 7.5 mm, thus ensuring negligible strain deviations. Region 1 represents the highest local strain norm (26.0% and 28.9% for two magnets (4) and four magnets (4), respectively), region 2 the center of the MRE sample (21.4% and 24.8% for two magnets (4) and four magnets (4), respectively), and region 3 the lowest local strain norm among them (13.5% and 20.4% for two magnets (4) and four magnets (4), respectively).

[0132] FIGS. 12 and 13 show a proof of concept to evaluate the ability of the system to transmit forces to the biological material (3), showing cellular polarization dynamics before and after magneto-mechanical stimulation.

[0133] FIG. 12 shows a distribution of the strain magnitude and principal traction forces on the contact surface between the multifunctional substrate (2) and the biological material (3) when subjected to the action of two (A) and four (B) permanent magnets (4), respectively. FIG. 12 also shows the regions which have been analyzed.

[0134] FIG. 13 shows the polarization dynamics in the 3 regions showed in FIG. 12, where a polar distribution of cell orientation is shown before and after stimulation. These results are for 2-hours stimulation. No significant differences between 2- and 24-hours stimulations are observed.

[0135] The results presented in FIG. 13 indicate a sound transmission of the mechanical forces generated in the substrate (2) to the cells. In the two-magnets (4) stimulation, the effect of local strains is translated into cell alignment towards the principal stretching direction and modulated by the magnitude of these local deformations. Thus, region 1 presents higher cell polarization than region 2, and the latter presents higher polarization than region 3.

[0136] Moreover, the four-magnets (4) stimulation does not present cell alignment in a clear preferred orientation. All these features are shown by the microscopic images and orientation distributions histograms shown in FIGS. 12 and 13.

[0137] In FIG. 12, it has to be noted that the magnetic particles present certain autofluorescence that in some figures overlaps with the cellular cytoskeleton stained in green.

[0138] These features suggest that the cellular alignment is determined by two main variables: the deformation state defined as the relation between principal strain components; and the magnitude of such strain components. Thus, a strain state close to uniaxial tension (i.e., one main principal component) promotes cell alignment, and this is modulated by the strain magnitude. However, if the cellular system is exposed to deformation states with no clear principal direction (i.e., close to biaxial loading), the cells do not polarize in a preferred direction.

[0139] The capability of the system to transmit dynamic loading to the biological material (3) is demonstrated. Therefore, the system is proved to be able to reproduce strain patterns on a soft substrate (2) but also to interact with the biological system cultured on it, allowing for studying the effects of heterogeneous mechanical scenarios on biological processes.

[0140] The viability and versatility of the complete experimental-computational framework for in vitro mechanical stimulation of cellular systems have been assessed by the two applications described. Firstly, the ability of the system to reproduce complex mechanical scenarios has been demonstrated by simulating a set of local strain patterns occurring within the brain tissue during a head impact. And the capability of the framework to transmit mechanical forces to cellular systems has been evaluated by subjecting primary human dermal fibroblasts (hFBs) to magneto-mechanical loading.

[0141] FIG. 14 shows a manufacturing method of magneto-responsive MRE substrates (2). Therefore, the manufacturing method of the MRE substrate (2) comprises the steps of mixing polymeric material and magnetic particles. Then, a degassing process is carried out by means of a vacuum chamber applying vacuum by using a pump for 20 minutes. After that, a curing step is performed heating to 80° C. for 2 hours, and then, a die-cut is done and a functionalization applying a collagen coating.