Sara Checa

Prof. Sara Checa


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

19Years (2008-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
10 January 2018 in Science Translational Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
APAnne-Marie Pobloth
Anne-Marie Pobloth
Sara ChecaSara Checa
Sara Checa
HRHajar Razi
Hajar Razi
APAnsgar Petersen
Ansgar Petersen
JWJames C. Weaver
James C. Weaver
PSPhilipp Schwabe
Philipp Schwabe
Soft, honeycomb-structured titanium-mesh scaffolds enhance bone regeneration in a large segmental defect in sheep.

15 November 2008 in Annals of Biomedical Engineering
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
Sara ChecaSara Checa
Sara Checa
PPPatrick J. Prendergast
Patrick J. Prendergast

1 August 2013 in Bone
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
BWBettina Willie
Bettina Willie
ABAnnette I. Birkhold
Annette I. Birkhold
HRHajar Razi
Hajar Razi
TTTobias Thiele
Tobias Thiele
MAMarta Aido
Marta Aido
GDGeorg N. Duda
Georg N. Duda

9 April 2015 in Journal of Bone and Mineral Research
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
HRHajar Razi
Hajar Razi
ABAnnette I Birkhold
Annette I Birkhold
RWRichard Weinkamer
Richard Weinkamer
GDGeorg N Duda
Georg N Duda
BWBettina Willie
Bettina Willie
Sara ChecaSara Checa
Sara Checa
: Physical activity is essential to maintain skeletal mass and structure, but its effect seems to diminish with age. To test the hypothesis that bone becomes less sensitive to mechanical strain with age, we used a combined in vivo/in silico approach. We investigated how maturation and aging influence the mechanical regulation of bone formation and resorption to 2 weeks of noninvasive in vivo controlled loading in mice. Using 3D in vivo morphometrical assessment of longitudinal microcomputed tomography images, we quantified sites in the mouse tibia where bone was deposited or resorbed in response to controlled in vivo loading. We compared the (re)modeling events (formation/resorption/quiescent) to the mechanical strains induced at these sites (predicted using finite element analysis). Mice of all age groups (young, adult, and elderly) responded to loading with increased formation and decreased resorption, preferentially at high strains. Low strains were associated with no anabolic response in adult and elderly mice, whereas young animals showed a strong response. Adult animals showed a clear separation between strain ranges where formation and resorption occurred but without an intermediate quiescent “lazy zone”. This strain threshold disappeared in elderly mice, as mechanically induced (re)modeling became dysregulated, apparent in an inability to inhibit resorption or initiate formation. Contrary to what is generally believed until now, aging does not shift the mechanical threshold required to initiate formation or resorption, but rather blurs its specificity. These data suggest that pharmaceutical strategies augmenting physical exercise should consider this dysfunction in the mechanical regulation of bone (re)modeling to more effectively combat age-related bone loss. © 2015 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

1 November 2014 in Biomaterials
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
ABAnnette I. Birkhold
Annette I. Birkhold
HRHajar Razi
Hajar Razi
GDGeorg N. Duda
Georg N. Duda
RWRichard Weinkamer
Richard Weinkamer
Sara ChecaSara Checa
Sara Checa
BWBettina Willie
Bettina Willie