Particle size in fat graft retention: A review on the impact of harvesting technique in lipofilling surgical outcomes
Gause TM., Kling RE., Sivak WN., Marra KG., Rubin JP., Kokai LE.
Narrative Review, published in Adipocyte (2014) — 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
- Narrative Review
- Journal
- Adipocyte (2014)
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 26317051
- PMCID
- PMC4550681
- DOI
- 10.4161/21623945.2014.957987
- Citations
- 54
Abstract (original English)
Fat grafting popularity continues to rise among plastic surgeons. As a soft tissue filler, adipose tissue had many desirable attributes: it is easy to obtain, autologous, and may reintegrate into recipient sites. However, fat grafting is clinically plagued by unpredictable resorption rates, thus there is much interest in optimizing the procedure of fat grafting for consistent graft volumes. Fat harvesting, a part of fat transfer surgery, involves the removal of adipose tissue from the donor site. Different harvest procedures, such as whole fat excision or liposuction cannulas, result in a range of fat particle volumes, which may play a role in the cellular stability of grafts. The ideal harvesting technique and fat particle diameter is not currently known. This study aims to review the literature on the impact of fat particle size and clinical fat grafting outcomes, to present overarching conclusions, and to provide future directions for study. Current evidence supports excisional methods and larger bore cannulas to minimize cellular damage, preserve the native architecture, and maximize the number of cells within fat particles.
What this study does not prove
- • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
- • This is a narrative review: it collects no new patient data and does not systematically appraise evidence quality.
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.