Level B· Emerging clinical evidence with positive signalsRandomized Controlled TrialPubMed

Elliptical Lipoaspirate Activation Versus Coleman Technique: A Randomized Double-Blinded Clinical Trial on Adipose Tissue Grafting for Scar Treatment.

Vinci V., Bucci F., Caimi E., Di Giuli R., Vaccari S., Ragaini EM.

Randomized Controlled Trial with a reported sample of 19 on Scar, published in Aesthetic Plast Surg (2025) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level B· Emerging clinical evidence with positive signalsEvidence level of this study

Several human studies show positive signals, while research methods and sample sizes continue to develop.

  • 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
Randomized Controlled Trial
Journal
Aesthetic Plast Surg (2025)
Country
United States
Reported sample size
19
Source database
PubMed
PMID
40195135
DOI
10.1007/s00266-025-04804-0
Citations
1

Abstract (original English)

Background Autologous fat grafting is widely used in reconstructive surgery and its use is increasing in different areas of regenerative medicine. This study evaluates the impact of elliptical lipoaspirate activation on adipose tissue grafting outcomes, focusing on scar-related pain reduction, improved scar characteristics, and increased tissue elasticity, comparing these outcomes with the traditional Coleman method. Methods This randomized double-blinded clinical trial study was conducted at the Humanitas Research Hospital in Milan from October 2022 to December 2023. Forty-three women aged 18-75 undergoing second-stage breast reconstruction were enrolled. The control group (19 patients) received the Coleman technique, while the study group (24 patients) underwent an additional elliptically oriented centrifugation. Method for evaluations included the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for pain, Range of Movement (ROM), the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS), and shear wave elastography for tissue elasticity. Results Both groups showed significant improvements over time. The case group demonstrated a greater decrease in VAS scores at 3 months (p = 0.015). POSAS scores were consistently better in the elliptical lipoaspirate activation group, significantly improving scar pruritus, pain, color, stiffness, thickness, and irregularity. Total POSAS score for both patient and ob

What this study does not prove

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

Evidence level

Several human studies show positive signals, while research methods and sample sizes continue to develop.

How we grade evidence
HumansFemaleDouble-Blind MethodAdultAdipose TissueMiddle AgedCicatrixMammaplastyYoung AdultTreatment Outcome

Browse all related research

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

Related research