Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesAnimal StudyPubMed

Lipoaspirate-derived secretome restores redox homeostasis to attenuate pathological scar formation.

Huang X., Ding P., Sun Z., Xiang H., Wei M., Bi H.

Animal Study on Scar, published in Stem Cell Res Ther (2026) — 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
Animal Study
Journal
Stem Cell Res Ther (2026)
Country
England
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
42401927
DOI
10.1186/s13287-026-05123-0

Abstract (original English)

Background Pathological scars are characterized by persistent fibroblast activation and excessive extracellular matrix (ECM) deposition. Although oxidative stress and dysregulated NRF2 signaling contribute to TGF-β1-mediated fibrosis in internal organs, their roles in cutaneous pathological scarring remain unclear. Secretome-based cell-free therapies have shown regenerative and antifibrotic potential, but whether lipoaspirate-derived secretome can restore fibroblast redox homeostasis and thereby attenuate pathological scarring is unknown. Methods Lipoaspirate fluid obtained during standard tumescent liposuction was processed by 100-kDa ultrafiltration to generate lipoaspirate-derived secretome (LA), while secretome from adipose-derived stromal cell (ADSC) culture supernatant served as a comparator (CS). LA and CS were characterized by nanoparticle tracking analysis, transmission electron microscopy, and immunoblotting for EV markers. In vivo efficacy was evaluated in a rabbit ear scar model with weekly intradermal LA injection, followed by gross, histological, collagen, and qPCR assessments. Comparative proteomic profiling of LA and CS was performed using data-independent acquisition LC-MS/MS with enrichment analysis, and paired human scar and normal skin samples were analyzed by single-cell RNA sequencing. In vitro, TGF-β1-stimulated fibroblasts were treated with LA or CS, and

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • This is preclinical work; animal or laboratory results cannot be applied to humans.

Evidence level

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

How we grade evidence

Browse all related research

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

Related research