摘要

Objectives: Since the birth of regenerative medicine, different types of cell transplantation techniques have become important treatments in medicine. Micrograft treatments have become more popular in the past 5 years because of their ease of use and effectiveness. Micrograft treatments are mostly accomplished by processing skin tissues to get progenitor fibroblast and melanocyte cells. Currently, many groups have switched to the mechanical isolation methods of fibroblast instead of lab-grown fibroblast cells. Introduction: Various types of skin rejuvenation techniques have been introduced in the past 10-15 years and the success of these techniques depends on their capacity to stimulate cellular regeneration. Fibroblast cells are presented as the building block of the skin. Our main focus is to separate progenitor fibroblast cells mostly placed in the bulge area of the hair follicle. The methods used to require GMP Laboratories to get Fibroblast cells. Due to practical and cellular restrictions, many groups have turned to the use of mechanical/bedside methods to isolate fibroblast treatments. Materials / method: Skin tissue harvesting was done by using the biopsy punch in this technique. For suspending the cells, PRP was used. Emulsification of skin tissue is a hard process without damaging the cells which is why a liquid is needed to suspend cells. Harvested samples were manually processed with special blades along with the PRP. Unprocessable skin remnants with Extra Cellular Matrix were filtrated (Filtered) through 150-micron filter for the purpose of safe injection. The end product was injected in order to provide dermal and superficial regeneration of the skin. Results: The final injectable cell suspension was injected into the patients. Most of the patients received scalp and skin injections. Within 3 months of follow-up, high rates of rejuvenation and hair growth were observed in all patients significantly. The micrograft portion was analyzed using fluorescence microscope in order to check for the nucleated cell counts along with their viability data. The viability of the final solution was around 95% on experimental points. In this study, no side effects or adverse reactions were observed/reported. Conclusion: Micrograft treatments are great alternatives to many conventional techniques. Also, the preparation of progenitor fibroblast-rich cell solution without sending samples to the GMP laboratories gives rapid operation and ensures cells to not lose their capacity for regeneration. Further studies are needed for long-lasting effects shall be followed up to conclude the superiority of this technique. Yet, these findings and clinical outcomes have shown Micrografting technique is a great and promising tool to prepare a fibroblast-enriched solution in safe conditions.