Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a study group (SG) regarding the use of FG-e-ASCs and also FG-e-PRP in breast augmentation for aesthetic improvement, comparing the results with a control group (CG) and at the same time the safety and efficacy of a study group (SG-1) regarding the use of FG-e-ASCs and FG-e-PRP in breast reconstruction, comparing the results with a control group (CG-1). Additionally, the same protocol (SG-2 vs CG-2) was applied for face soft tissue defects evaluation.
The mechanical minimal manipulation of fat was showed.
Introduction: Fat grafts enhanced with adipose-derived stem cells (FG-e-ASCs) and with Platelet-Rich Plasma (PRP) have been used in outcomes of radiotherapy after mastectomy, breast soft tissue defects, ulcers, and loss of substance. The author presents his experience using FG-e-ASCs and FG-e-PRP in breast augmentation, breast reconstruction and for soft tissue defects.
Materials / method: 46 patients affected by breast hypoplasia (SG) were treated with FG-e-ASCs, comparing results with those of a CG (n = 30) treated with fat graft not enhanced (FG-ne-ASCs).
121 patients (SG-1) who were affected by the outcomes of breast oncoplastic surgery were treated with FG-e-ASC.
33 patients (SG-2) who were affected by the face soft tissue defects were treated with FG-e-PRP, comparing results with those of a CG-2 (n = 30) treated with fat graft not enhanced (FG-ne-PRP).
Results: The patients treated, for breast augmentation (SG), with FG-e-ASCs showed (through MRI) 58% maintenance of fat volume after 3 years compared with the patients of the CG treated with FG-ne-ASCs, who showed 29% maintenance. The patients treated, for breast reconstruction (SG-1), with FG-e-ASCs showed (through MRI) 51% maintenance of fat volume after 3 years compared with the patients of the CG-1 treated with FG-ne-ASCs, who showed 21% maintenance.
The patients treated, for face soft tissue defects (SG-2), with FG-e-PRP showed (through MRI) 63% maintenance of fat volume after 3 years vs 21%CG-2.
Conclusion: The use of FG-e-ASCs and FG-e-PRP was safe and effective in this series of cases performed.
Divulgação de informações
Você recebeu algum patrocínio para sua pesquisa neste tema?
Não
Você recebeu algum tipo de honorário, pagamento ou outra forma de compensação por seu trabalho neste estudo?
Não
Você possui relação financeira com alguma entidade que possa competir com os medicamentos, materiais ou instrumentos abordados no seu estudo?
Não
Você detém ou pediu a registro de patente para algum dos instrumentos, medicamentos ou materiais abordados no seu estudo?
Não
Este trabalho não recebeu nenhum patrocínio direto ou indireto. O mesmo está sob a própria responsabilidade do seu autor.