Sustained volume retention in vivo with adipocyte and lipoaspirate seeded silk scaffolds
Bellas E., Panilaitis BJ., Glettig DL., Kirker-Head CA., Yoo JJ., Marra KG.
Animal Study, published in Biomaterials (2013) — 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
- Animal Study
- Journal
- Biomaterials (2013)
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 23374707
- PMCID
- PMC3663872
- DOI
- 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2013.01.058
- Citations
- 38
Abstract (original English)
Current approaches to soft tissue regeneration include the use of fat grafts, natural or synthetic biomaterials as filler materials. Fat grafts and natural biomaterials resorb too quickly to maintain tissue regeneration, while synthetic materials do not degrade or regenerate tissue. Here, we present a simple approach to volume stable filling of soft tissue defects. In this study, we combined lipoaspirate with a silk protein matrix in a subcutaneous rat model. Silk biomaterials can be tailored to fit a variety of needs, and here were processed silk biomaterials into a porous sponge format to allow for tissue ingrowth while remaining mechanically robust. Over an 18 month period, the lipoaspirate seeded silk protein matrix regenerated subcutaneous adipose tissue while maintaining the original implanted volume. A silk protein matrix alone was not sufficient to regenerate adipose tissue, but yielded a fibrous tissue, although implanted volume was maintained. This work presents a significant improvement to the standard approaches to filling soft tissue defects by matching biomaterial degradation and tissue regeneration profiles.
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.