Objectives: The main objective of the present review was to examine the most common cell-based harvested tissue regenerative medicine treatments outcome evaluation.
Introduction: Multiple regenerative methods, appeared during the last years, are applied for elderly skin rejuvenation, wrinkles reduction, scar treatments. Nonetheless, no standardized, homogeneous assessment protocols and follow up timings have been established.
Materials / method: This review research method is based on a literature search. 586 Papers regarding macrofat, microfat, nanofat, stromal vascular fraction and Rigenera for face rejuvenation procedures have been found. Therefore, 68 papers were selected for the further quality analysis assessment.
Results: According to the literature analysis, there is an important heterogeneity among the papers regarding cell-based treatments.
In 33 papers out of 68 (48,5%) standardized photography has been reported, while in 22 papers out of 68 (32,3%) non-standardized photography has been reported.
In 8 papers out of 68 (11,8%) 3D photography has been used as an evaluation tool, while in 11 out of 68 papers (16,2%) other forms of imaging evaluation, such as TC and MRI have been used.
Validated PROMs have been proposed in 9 papers out of 68 (13,%), while in 10 out of 68 papers (14,7%) not-validated PROM
Conclusion: Ideally Validated PROM, corresponding to an objective evaluation 3D photography that allows skin analysis, standardized photography, and short (1 and 3 months), medium (1 year) and long follow up (2, 3 and 5 year) results as an ideal protocol for the best outcome assessment.
Findings in this research may be a general guideline for the cell regenerative medicine treatmetns and, therefore, may be the basis for the future evidence-based medicine.
Disclosures
Did you receive any funding to support your research for this TOPIC?
No
Were you provided with any honoraria, payment or other compensation for your work on this study?
No
Do you have any financial relationship with any entity which may closely compete with the medications, materials or instruments covered by your study?
No
Do you own or have you applied for any patents in conjunction with the instruments, medications or materials discussed in your study?
No
This work was not supported by any direct or non direct funding. It is under the author's own responsability