The Utility of Fat Grafting to Manage Burn Scars: A Systematic Review.

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

• 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

Abstract (original English)

Secondary management of thermal injuries remains a challenging and relevant topic for plastic and nonplastic burn surgeons alike. Burn scars are associated with both functional limitations and aesthetic challenges for patients. While various treatment modalities exist for the management of these scars, no gold standard has been established. Fat grafting has been used in various reconstructive contexts, and studies have demonstrated improvement in skin texture and contour following infiltration. This systematic review aims to examine the available evidence on outcomes following fat grafting for the management of burn scars. A search of Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases was conducted from their inception until November 2024. Published articles examining outcomes of fat grafting for thermal injury scars were identified, screened, and data were extracted following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. A total of 10 740 articles were screened, yielding 14 eligible studies for data extraction, accounting for 885 patients. All studies reported improvement of scars postoperatively. Nine out of 14 studies used a subjective clinical assessment, 1 study did not report pretreatment measurements, and the other 8 studies all found improved outcomes based on clinician assessment. One study reported Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) scores and an

Evidence level

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

Browse all related research

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