Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesNarrative ReviewPubMed

A Bibliometric and Visualization Analysis on the Research of Fat Grafting from 1945 to 2021.

Li B., Ri C., Mao J., Zhao M.

Narrative Review on Facial Rejuvenation, published in Aesthetic Plast Surg (2022) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesEvidence level of this study

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
Read the A–D evidence level guide

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
Aesthetic Plast Surg (2022)
Country
United States
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
36261744
DOI
10.1007/s00266-022-03137-6
Citations
3

Abstract (original English)

Background It is very important to generate a comprehensive assessment of the fat grafting field due to the rapid growth of scientific literature. The current study aimed to use bibliometric analysis to evaluate fat grafting research qualitatively and quantitatively and determine the research hotspots and trends in this field. Methods Publications on fat grafting research were extracted from the Web of Science core collection database. VOSviewer 1.6.18 was applied to perform the bibliometric analysis of these articles. Results A total of 2558 studies published by 594 different journals authored by 9097 researchers were contained in this study. In the co-authorship analysis, the bulk of the retrieved studies was conducted by the USA, followed by China, Italy and Japan, while the most productive institution, journal and author were Chinese Academy of Medicine Sciences, Plastic and Reconstruction Surgery and Klinger M, respectively. In the co-cited analysis, the most top cited author, journal, organization and country were Coleman Sr, Plastic and Reconstruction Surgery, New York University and the USA, respectively. The map of keywords occurrence revealed the most active research aspects were focused on "surgery," "cell," "breast reconstruction" and "survival" and the time overlay mapping showed that the most active research hotspots were "breast reconstruction" and "retention". C

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 evidence
HumansAdipose TissueBibliometricsMammaplastyPlastic Surgery Procedures

Browse all related research

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

Related research