Mechanical isolation of stromal vascular fraction using a spiral-based device: cellular outcomes and point-of-care workflow considerations.
Sforza M., Ivanenko O., Biabani N., Sforza L., Kalaskar DM., Mohri Z.
Laboratory Study, published in J Biol Eng (2026) — 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
- Laboratory Study
- Journal
- J Biol Eng (2026)
- Country
- England
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- PubMed
- PMID
- 42092993
- DOI
- 10.1186/s13036-026-00688-z
Abstract (original English)
Background Stromal vascular fraction (SVF) from adipose tissue represents a promising source of regenerative cells. A major trend in SVF isolation is the increasing use of dedicated devices and systems to enhance standardization and reproducibility. Real-world implementation of new technologies requires consideration of workflow-related factors alongside biological results. This study primarily aimed to characterize the novel BMC Uniq® SVF device, describe a mechanical isolation approach (MI-SVF) with this device, and evaluate the cellular outcomes of MI-SVF. Enzymatic isolation (EI-SVF) was included as a reference method for comparison of selected cellular parameters. Results The BMC Uniq® SVF device is a spiral-based, closed system composed of two housings and three filters, designed as a sterile disposable unit. Lipoaspirate samples from 10 healthy female donors were equally divided and handled using MI-SVF (decantation, device processing, centrifugation) or EI-SVF (adding collagenase and post-digestion steps to the MI-SVF protocol). Total cell yield was significantly greater in the EI-SVF group (mean ± standard error (SE) 94.9 × 10 4 ± 6.4 × 10 4 versus 37.5 × 10 4 ± 2.7 × 10 4 for MI-SVF; p = 0.002). The flow cytometry demonstrated significantly higher relative proportions of CD90+ (10.3 ± 1.3% versus 5.4 ± 0.9%; p = 0.014) and CD73+ cells (10.7 ± 0.7% versus 6.6 ± 0.7%; p
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 evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.