Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesLaboratory StudyPubMedOpen access

Mechanical Processing of Lipoaspirate With a Fluidic Device Platform Promotes Wound Healing Transcriptional Programs and Angiogenesis In Vitro.

Lombardo JA., Banyard DA., Zalazar D., Ziegler M., Sorensen AM., Phummirat P.

Laboratory Study on Chronic Wound, published in Aesthet Surg J (2025) — 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
Laboratory Study
Journal
Aesthet Surg J (2025)
Country
England
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
40205801
PMCID
PMC12260377
DOI
10.1093/asj/sjaf055
Citations
1

Abstract (original English)

Background Mechanical processing of lipoaspirate (LA) produces a stromal vascular fraction (SVF) without enzymatic digestion for use in aesthetic, surgical, and regenerative applications. We recently presented novel device technologies that increased mesenchymal stem cell (MSC) content relative to standard nanofat (NF) processing. Objectives Here, we introduce a third technology designed to enhance fluid shear forces and explore the impact of mechanical processing on regenerative potential in vitro. Methods Human LA samples were processed with our previously reported emulsification micronization device and filtration device, and then optimized using a new shearing device (SD). Results were analyzed for total cell count, viability, and percentages of endothelial progenitor cells (EPCs) and MSCs compared to manual NF processing, both immediately and following 24-hour culture. Expression of genes related to wound healing was quantified by real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction, and angiogenic capacity was determined with an in vitro 3-dimensional sprouting assay. Results The SD did not significantly affect MSC recovery or viability, but EPCs were enriched in a shear stress-dependent manner. Gene expression was not altered immediately after processing, but after culture we noted changes to wound-healing transcriptional programs that were consistently stronger for our devi

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
HumansNeovascularization, PhysiologicWound HealingMesenchymal Stem CellsCells, CulturedEndothelial Progenitor CellsAdipose TissueCell SurvivalStress, MechanicalLipectomy

Browse all related research

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

Related research