Autologous adipose tissue grafting for the management of the painful scar.

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 aims There is currently no definitive treatment for the painful scar. Autologous adipose tissue grafting (AATG) as a treatment option for scars has become increasingly popular and there is now an abundance of evidence in the literature that supports its application. Some studies suggest that human adipose tissue is a rich source of multipotent mesenchymal stromal cells. To our knowledge, there is currently no systematic literature review to date that examines the effectiveness of AATG for reducing pain in scars. Our novel systematic review aims to examine clinical studies on the use of AATG in the treatment of the painful scar. Methods A literature search was performed using the following databases: PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Web of Science, Medline, Cochrane library and Embase. The following key words and search terms were used: adipose stem cells, scar, pain, autologous fat grafting, scar management and neuropathic pain. Human interventional studies using autologous adipose tissue grafting for the treatment of painful scars including case series, case-control, cohort studies and randomized controlled trials were reviewed. Results A total of 387 studies were found and 18 studies from January 1990 to January 2019 were identified as relevant for the purpose of this systematic review. Two studies were evidence level V, seven were

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.