Adipose-derived stem cell enrichment is counter-productive for the majority of women seeking primary aesthetic breast augmentation by autologous fat transfer: A systematic review.

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

• Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
• Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
• Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
• Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
• Emerging · Emerging topic under active research

Abstract (original English)

Background Autologous lipotransfer (AL) is a popular method despite unpredictable retention rates. Higher retention rates have been reported when co-administering adipose-derived stem cells (ASCs), a process called cell-assisted lipotransfer (CAL). Our hypothesis is that CAL might indeed limit volume gain in most women seeking aesthetic breast augmentation because it doubles the amount of fat required without consistently improving the outcome. Methods Electronic databases were searched for articles published between January 2008 and October 2019 in English and German. All original articles evaluating fat viability following autologous breast augmentation in vivo were included. Based on the reported retention rates, potential volume gains were estimated for CAL and AL. Results A total of 23 studies were selected. The AL retention rate varied from 39% to 76%, whereas CAL increased this rate at best by 24%. The body mass index (BMI) ranged from 18.8 to 23.4 (20.4±1.6) in the study population, whereas the BMI of women in the same age group is 28.7 (±8.4). We calculated that, starting from 200 ml of harvested fat and after two sessions of AL of 100 ml each, the volume retained would be at most 152 ml. In contrast, after one session of CAL of 100 ml, while the remaining 100 ml are used to isolate ASCs, a maximum of 95 ml of fat would remain. Conclusion The volume gain after two sess

Evidence level

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.