Level C· Early human research exploring benefitsProspective StudyPubMed

Tissue buccal fat pad-stromal vascular fraction as a safe source in maxillofacial bone regeneration: A clinical pilot study.

Bohlouli M., Bastami F., Nokhbatolfoghahei H., Khojasteh A.

Prospective Study with a reported sample of 5 on Face & Skin, published in J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg (2023) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level C· Early human research exploring benefitsEvidence level of this study

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
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
Prospective Study
Journal
J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg (2023)
Country
Netherlands
Reported sample size
5
Source database
PubMed
PMID
36917913
DOI
10.1016/j.bjps.2023.01.027
Citations
3

Abstract (original English)

Aim The purpose of this study was to examine the biological properties of the buccal fat pad (BFP)-derived tissue stromal vascular fraction (tSVF) in vitro and compare them with BFP-derived cellular SVF (cSVF). Furthermore, a clinical pilot study assessed the safety of using BFP-derived tSVF for maxillofacial bone regeneration. Materials and methods This study was performed in two sections: 1) experimental section: BFP tissue was harvested from three healthy donors, and then cSVF and tSVF were isolated by enzymatic and mechanical methods to assess their biological properties and 2) clinical section: Ten patients with maxillofacial bone defects were enrolled according to eligibility criteria and offered two options for surgery, including autologous BFP-tSVF (n = 5) and autologous bone grafting (n = 5), to evaluate safety after a year of follow-up. Results The BFP-tSVF exhibited high cell viability and various cell surface markers, including CD45, CD31, and CD34. There was no population-doubling time and multilineage differentiation capacity compared with BFP-cSVF. BFP-tSVF is safe because of the lack of intervention-related adverse events reported in donor and surgery sites during a one-year period. In addition, cell therapy was feasible because it can be performed during surgery and requires little preparation time. Patients in the ABG group experienced pain and tenderness in t

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 evidence
HumansAdipose TissuePilot ProjectsStromal Vascular FractionCell DifferentiationBone Regeneration

Browse all related research

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

Related research