Recurring Meeting of Cleveland Clinic Core Team

Date: September 20, 2016

Time: 10:30 AM EST

Means: In person meeting


  1. Ahmet Erdemir
  2. Snehal Chokhandre
  3. Robb Colbrunn
  4. Tara Bonner


  1. Discuss immediate action items from the last meeting.
  2. Discuss progress of tissue testing protocol evaluation.
  3. Discuss segmentation plan and progress.
  4. Decide immediate action items for the next meeting.
  5. Other.

Ongoing Action Items:


  1. Discuss immediate action items from the last meeting.
    • Most action items were related to the ongoing agenda items; refer to discussions below.
  2. Discuss progress of tissue testing protocol evaluation.
    • Snehal conducted repeated tests (two per sample) on meniscus including unconfined and confined compression and tension.
      • Unconfined compression showed some discrepancies, which was surprising. Snehal noted that the sample got stuck on the head of the testing machine during unloading, which may have caused the discrepancies. The tests need to be repeated.
      • Confined compression also showed some discrepancies. Ahmet attributed these to pre-test find contact protocol to find reference displacement for target strains. He suspects that a higher find contact force for confined compression tests may resolve this issue.
      • Discrepancies were documented for tensile testing as well. Snehal suspected high target strain levels potentially causing clamping failure in between tests. She reduced the target strain from 15% to 9%. The reproducibility improved for lower target strains.
      • Ahmet recommended Snehal to conduct three repetitions rather than two. This may indicate whether variations between tests are random or towards a certain direction.
    • Ahmet recommended Snehal to create a dashboard for tissue testing reproducibility. This can be a table in tissue testing specifications with rows representing tissue types (cartilage, meniscus, ligament, tendon) and columns testing types (unconfined compression, confined compression, tension). At the intersection of these; Snehal can provide a link to wiki page of the exact version of the testing protocol used; followed by raw data from three repeated tests and a link to a brief document including her interpretation and sample details. In response to a question from Robb, Snehal and Ahmet noted that further iterations of tissue testing can be documented in protocol evaluation page. The dashboard can provide a summary of results that can be conveyed easily.
    • Snehal showed the Mach-1 protocol file. It seems to be a binary file and a master document including all protocols and settings. The team will take a look at the Mach-1 files together and if necessary, reach out to Martin Garon of Biomomentum, Inc.
  3. Discuss segmentation plan and progress.
    • Ahmet and Snehal has not been working on segmentation. Tara still needs to work out details of meniscus segmentation. Robb has been comparing his segmentations with those by others. He is not worried about the discrepancies for the anterior part of the patella. He is mostly focusing on defining the boundaries of patella cartilage appropriately.
  4. Decide immediate action items for the next meeting.
    • See Ongoing Action Items above.
  5. Other.
    • None noted.

RecurringMeetings/2016-09-20 (last edited 2016-09-21 14:45:14 by aerdemir)