Autologous fat grafting for nerve regeneration and neuropathic pain: current state from bench-to-bedside.
Dehdashtian A., Bratley JV., Svientek SR., Kung TA., Awan TM., Cederna PS.
Narrative Review, published in Regen Med (2020) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.
- 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
This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.
- Study type
- Narrative Review
- Journal
- Regen Med (2020)
- Country
- England
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- PubMed
- PMID
- 33264053
- DOI
- 10.2217/rme-2020-0103
- Citations
- 19
Abstract (original English)
Despite recent advances in microsurgical techniques, functional recovery following peripheral nerve injury remains slow and inadequate. Poor peripheral nerve regeneration not only leaves patients with significant impairments, but also commonly leads to the development of debilitating neuropathic pain. Recent research has demonstrated the potential therapeutic benefits of adipose-derived stem cells, to enhance nerve regeneration. However, clinical translation remains limited due to the current regulatory burdens of the US FDA. A reliable and immediately translatable alternative is autologous fat grafting, where native adipose-derived stem cells present in the transferred tissue can potentially act upon regenerating axons. This review presents the scope of adipose tissue-based therapies to enhance outcomes following peripheral nerve injury, specifically focusing on their role in regeneration and ameliorating neuropathic pain.
What this study does not prove
- • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
- • This is a narrative review: it collects no new patient data and does not systematically appraise evidence quality.
Evidence level
Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.
How we grade evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.