Level C· Early human research exploring benefitsProspective StudyPubMedOpen access

Comparison the Effect of Conventional and Nanofat Injection Methods on Nasolabial Fold Lipofilling: A Case- Control Study.

Mamizadeh M., Tahmasebi Ghorabi S., Mansourinia Z., Shadfar F., Karimi Rouzbahani A.

Prospective Study on Skin Aging, Facial Rejuvenation, published in World J Plast Surg (2024) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level C· Early human research exploring benefitsEvidence level of this study

Early human evidence such as case series or small samples is exploring possible benefits.

  • 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
Prospective Study
Journal
World J Plast Surg (2024)
Country
Iran
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
38742030
PMCID
PMC11088738
DOI
10.61186/wjps.13.1.24

Abstract (original English)

Nasolabial folds are a common sign of aging, accompanied by various manifestations such as skin and tissue loosening, wrinkles, lip corner drooping, mandibular angle loss, platysmal bands, and skin pigmentation changes. Limited research has explored Nanofat injection methods. this study was done with the aim of comparing the effect of fat injection by two methods, conventional and Nanofat, in nasolabial folds. The study conducted in 2020-2021 at the skin clinic in Ilam, western Iran was a case-control study. Participants were divided into two groups, and lipofilling procedures were performed using conventional and nanofat methods with autologous fat. Data collection utilized a researcher-made questionnaire and radiographic results. Follow-up visits occurred on the 30th, 90th, and 180th days to assess complications and recovery rates. After 6 months, participant's photographs were taken and compared with pre-intervention photographs using the GIAS criteria. Data analysis was conducted using SPSS22 version software. The average age of the participants was 37.80±8.30 yr. The treatment response in the conventional fat injection group was significantly better than the nanofat group (P<0.05). Both groups were satisfied with the treatment methods, but high satisfaction was reported in the conventional group, but there was no statistically significant difference between the groups. Bot

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.

Evidence level

Early human evidence such as case series or small samples is exploring possible benefits.

How we grade evidence

Browse all related research

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

Related research