Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesAnimal StudyPubMed

Optimization and Standardization of the Immunodeficient Mouse Model for Assessing Fat Grafting Outcomes.

Kokai LE., Jones TL., Silowash R., Theisen B., DiBernardo G., Lu A.

Animal Study, published in Plast Reconstr Surg (2017) — 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
Plast Reconstr Surg (2017)
Country
United States
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
28806292
DOI
10.1097/PRS.0000000000003868
Citations
7

Abstract (original English)

Background Animal models are often used to assess interventions that might improve fat grafting outcomes; however, there is great variability in the models. The authors sought to determine the predictive value of the immunocompromised mouse model for fat grafting so that experiments could be standardized and optimized. Methods Human lipoaspirate injections at different volumes and time points were assessed in a nude mouse model and compared with control injections of nonviable fat. Volume retention and explant histologic score were compared. In a separate study, interanimal reproducibility was determined by implanting a highly consistent hydrogel and measuring variability in volume retention. Results Injection volume significantly affects adipose resorption kinetics at 6 and 12 weeks. Masson trichrome staining revealed that macrophages were unable to infiltrate large (1 ml) grafts, and oil cysts were not absorbed by 18 weeks, which interfered with interpretation of volume retention data. Nonviable tissue was resorbed when grafts were 0.3 ml, and quantification of graft histologic viability correlated well with graft retention at all study time points. Interanimal variability was measured to be 8.44 percent of the mean retention volume for small graft volumes. Conclusions Human fat graft retention in the immunodeficient mouse correlates with graft viability in small, 0.3-ml-volu

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
Adipose TissueAnimalsDisease Models, AnimalFemaleGraft SurvivalHeterograftsHumansImmunocompromised HostKineticsMice, Nude

Browse all related research

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