Thank you Joachim Pimiskern, Benjamin Frey. But if I want to check any physical stress on a very small organ, then is there any possible in vitro model to study?
Tissue is a complex mixture of different types of cells that include as minimum endothelial cells and cells of immune system. This mixture of cell creates a unique local microenvironment. 3D cell culture of homogeneous population of cells, oh well, mimics nothing.
I mostly agree with Sergey Doronin, however cartilage is a tissue devoid of blood vessels as well as of cells different from condroblasts. Application of mechanical stress on 3D cultures of chondroblasts might possibly mimic conditions present in the original organ, although I am not an expert of chondroblast culturing. Nevertheless the effects of architectural relationships between collagen fibres and cells in cartilage would be hard to reproduce in a 3D cell culture.
I'm reading with a great interest all your suggestions and advices (thank you Ratkim for this topic !)nand I have a question : what do you think about fibroblasts-derived cell matrices ? This matrice was described by Beacham et Cuckierman E in 2007 (current protocol in cell biology) and several papers used this protocol to study cancer cell physiology. I'm very interesting by this matrice (rich in fibronectin) for my cancer model (leukemia) but I don't know if this matrice is really appropriate. So, what are your advices ?
The goal of 3D cell culture may not be to specifically mimic an organ in vitro. The goal is to represent the tissue *better* than a 2d system. There are limitations in every technology up to a clinical trial. As a screening methodology, homogenous 2D cell culture is cheap and easy, 3D is cheapish and easyish, 3D co-culture is starting to get pricier and harder, animal studies are costly and more challenging and a clinical trial is much more expensive. The 3D co-culture of cells is becoming more relevant. I have attached a really cool publication using the HyStem hydrogel technology.