Microfat and Nanofat Grafting in Genital Rejuvenation.
Menkes S., SidAhmed-Mezi M., Meningaud JP., Benadiba L., Magalon G., Hersant B.
Prospective Study, published in Aesthet Surg J (2021) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
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
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
- Aesthet Surg J (2021)
- Country
- England
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- PubMed
- PMID
- 32386063
- DOI
- 10.1093/asj/sjaa118
- Citations
- 14
Abstract (original English)
Genitourinary syndrome of menopause (GSM) is a major problem in many post- or perimenopausal women. Lipofilling has long been considered to be an effective technique for restoring volume, but the discovery of its trophic proprieties has made it the most widely utilized method in regenerative medicine. The authors aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of microfat and nanofat grafting for vulvovaginal rejuvenation. Women with GSM who met the inclusion criteria were enrolled. Women received microfat in the labia majora and nanofat in the vagina; follow-up was conducted 1, 3, 6, 12, and 18 months. The vaginal health index (VHI) and Female Sexual Distress (FSD) were utilized to assess improvement in vulvovaginal atrophy, orgasm, and sexual desire posttreatment. Fifty women were included; their average age was 53 years (range, 45-63 years). The VHI score significantly increased at 1 and 3 months after treatment (P < 0.0001). Moreover, the average FSD score showed a significant improvement at 1 and 3 months posttreatment. This score stabilized from 6 to 12 months but showed further improvement at 18 months. At 6 months posttreatment, for both scales, data pertaining to 80% of patients appeared normalized. There was a particular benefit noted for dryness and dyspareunia. At 18 months, the results remained stable for all of patients. No major side effects were observed. There are now
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 evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.