• Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?

A Comprehensive In Vitro Comparison of Preparation Techniques for Fat Grafting

L. Streit, J. Jaros, V. Sedlakova, M. Sedlackova, L. Drazan, M. Svoboda, J. Pospisil, T. Vyska, J. Vesely, A. Hampl,

. 2017 ; 139 (3) : 670e-682e.

Jazyk angličtina Země Spojené státy americké

Typ dokumentu srovnávací studie, časopisecké články

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc17023258

BACKGROUND: Lipomodeling is a technique that uses the patient's own fat for tissue regeneration and augmentation. The extent of regenerative effect is reported to be determined by the numbers of adipose-derived stem cells and the viability of cells in processed adipose tissue which, together with other factors, influence the degree of graft retention. This study addresses whether differences exist in properties of fat graft obtained by three commonly used techniques. METHODS: Adipose tissue harvested from the hypogastric regions of 14 patients was processed by decantation, centrifugation, and membrane-based tissue filtration. The morphology of each preparation was assessed by electron microscopy and overall cell viability was assessed by live/dead assay. The number of adipose-derived stem cells was determined and their stem cell character was assessed by the presence of cell surface molecules (i.e., CD105, CD90, CD31, and CD45) and by their capacity to differentiate into adipogenic and osteogenic lineages. RESULTS: First, morphologies of processed fat samples obtained by individual procedures differed, but no preparation caused obvious damage to cellular or acellular components. Second, although the highest numbers of adipose-derived stem cells were contained in the upper fraction of centrifuged lipoaspirates, the difference between preparations was marginal. Third, the maximal concentration of adipose fraction (removal of watery component) of lipoaspirate was achieved by membrane-based tissue filtration. Finally, no significant differences in overall viability were detected. CONCLUSIONS: Properties of processed lipoaspirate were influenced by the preparation procedure. However, the differences were not dramatic; both centrifugation and membrane-based filtration are methods of choice whose selection depends on other criteria (e.g., practicality) for individual surgical settings.

Citace poskytuje Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc17023258
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20170908125246.0
007      
ta
008      
170720s2017 xxu f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1097/PRS.0000000000003124 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)28234835
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a xxu
100    1_
$a Streit, Libor $u Brno, Czech Republic From the Department of Plastic and Aesthetic Surgery and the International Clinical Research Center, St. Anne's University Hospital Brno; and the Department of Histology and Embryology, Faculty of Medicine, and the Institute of Biostatistics and Analysis, Masaryk University.
245    12
$a A Comprehensive In Vitro Comparison of Preparation Techniques for Fat Grafting / $c L. Streit, J. Jaros, V. Sedlakova, M. Sedlackova, L. Drazan, M. Svoboda, J. Pospisil, T. Vyska, J. Vesely, A. Hampl,
520    9_
$a BACKGROUND: Lipomodeling is a technique that uses the patient's own fat for tissue regeneration and augmentation. The extent of regenerative effect is reported to be determined by the numbers of adipose-derived stem cells and the viability of cells in processed adipose tissue which, together with other factors, influence the degree of graft retention. This study addresses whether differences exist in properties of fat graft obtained by three commonly used techniques. METHODS: Adipose tissue harvested from the hypogastric regions of 14 patients was processed by decantation, centrifugation, and membrane-based tissue filtration. The morphology of each preparation was assessed by electron microscopy and overall cell viability was assessed by live/dead assay. The number of adipose-derived stem cells was determined and their stem cell character was assessed by the presence of cell surface molecules (i.e., CD105, CD90, CD31, and CD45) and by their capacity to differentiate into adipogenic and osteogenic lineages. RESULTS: First, morphologies of processed fat samples obtained by individual procedures differed, but no preparation caused obvious damage to cellular or acellular components. Second, although the highest numbers of adipose-derived stem cells were contained in the upper fraction of centrifuged lipoaspirates, the difference between preparations was marginal. Third, the maximal concentration of adipose fraction (removal of watery component) of lipoaspirate was achieved by membrane-based tissue filtration. Finally, no significant differences in overall viability were detected. CONCLUSIONS: Properties of processed lipoaspirate were influenced by the preparation procedure. However, the differences were not dramatic; both centrifugation and membrane-based filtration are methods of choice whose selection depends on other criteria (e.g., practicality) for individual surgical settings.
650    _2
$a tukové buňky $7 D017667
650    _2
$a tuková tkáň $x transplantace $7 D000273
650    _2
$a mladiství $7 D000293
650    _2
$a dospělí $7 D000328
650    _2
$a kultivované buňky $7 D002478
650    _2
$a cytologické techniky $7 D003584
650    _2
$a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    _2
$a mužské pohlaví $7 D008297
650    _2
$a lidé středního věku $7 D008875
650    _2
$a kmenové buňky $7 D013234
650    _2
$a odběr tkání a orgánů $x metody $7 D020858
650    _2
$a mladý dospělý $7 D055815
655    _2
$a srovnávací studie $7 D003160
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
700    1_
$a Jaros, Josef
700    1_
$a Sedlakova, Veronika
700    1_
$a Sedlackova, Miroslava
700    1_
$a Drazan, Lubos
700    1_
$a Svoboda, Michal
700    1_
$a Pospisil, Jakub
700    1_
$a Vyska, Tomas
700    1_
$a Vesely, Jiri
700    1_
$a Hampl, Ales
773    0_
$w MED00010436 $t Plastic and reconstructive surgery $x 1529-4242 $g Roč. 139, č. 3 (2017), s. 670e-682e
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28234835 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y a $z 0
990    __
$a 20170720 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20170908125847 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 1238939 $s 984171
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC
BMC    __
$a 2017 $b 139 $c 3 $d 670e-682e $i 1529-4242 $m Plastic and reconstructive surgery $n Plast Reconstr Surg $x MED00010436
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20170720

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

Nahrávání dat ...

Možnosti archivace

Nahrávání dat ...