Level C· Early human research exploring benefitsRetrospective StudyPubMedOpen access

Topical Application of SVF/PRF in Thermal Injuries-A Retrospective Analysis.

Naef L., Vasella M., Watson J., Reid G., Breckwoldt T., Waldner M.

Retrospective Study with a reported sample of 13 on Chronic Wound, Burns, Scar, published in J Clin Med (2025) — 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
Retrospective Study
Journal
J Clin Med (2025)
Country
Switzerland
Reported sample size
13
Source database
PubMed
PMID
40649083
PMCID
PMC12250352
DOI
10.3390/jcm14134710

Abstract (original English)

Background : The traditional management of acute burn wounds using eschar debridement followed by split-thickness skin grafting has notable drawbacks. Stromal vascular fraction (SVF), derived from autologous adipose tissue, promotes epithelialization and angiogenesis, while platelet-rich fibrin (PRF), obtained via centrifugation of patient blood, enhances wound healing. This study retrospectively analyzes the outcomes of patients with thermal injuries treated with a combination of topical SVF and PRF at the University Hospital Zurich Burn Center. Methods : From 2018 to 2020, 13 patients with deep partial-thickness burns (DPTBs) or mixed-pattern burns (MPBs) received combined topical SVF and PRF treatment. Eschar removal was performed enzymatically or surgically following hydrotherapy. SVF was collected via liposuction, and PRF from centrifuged blood. Healing progress, additional surgeries, and scar outcomes (assessed by the Manchester Scar Scale, MSS) were evaluated retrospectively. Results : The mean total body surface area burned was 29.6%, with 6.3% treated using SVF and PRF. Five patients required further surgical intervention for residual defects. Complete healing occurred within 20 days in patients without residual defects and within 51 days in those with defects. Higher MSS scores were observed in patients requiring additional surgery. No adverse effects were noted. Conc

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • Without an adequate control group, treatment effects cannot be separated from other factors.

Evidence level

Early human evidence such as case series or small samples is exploring possible benefits.

How we grade evidence

Browse all related research

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

Related research