Loading…

A pilot study on ex vivo expanded autologous adipose‐derived stem cells of improving fat retention in localized scleroderma patients

In patients with localized scleroderma (LoS), facial deformity induced by subcutaneous atrophy greatly reduces life quality. Autologous fat grafting (AFG) is used for volume restoration but with low‐fat retention due to various reasons. Adipose‐derived stem cells (ADSCs) have shown potential effects...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Stem cells translational medicine 2021-08, Vol.10 (8), p.1148-1156
Main Authors: Wang, Chenyu, Long, Xiao, Si, Loubin, Chen, Bo, Zhang, Yiwei, Sun, Tianyu, Zhang, Xiuqin, Zhao, Robert Chunhua, Wang, Xiaojun
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:In patients with localized scleroderma (LoS), facial deformity induced by subcutaneous atrophy greatly reduces life quality. Autologous fat grafting (AFG) is used for volume restoration but with low‐fat retention due to various reasons. Adipose‐derived stem cells (ADSCs) have shown potential effects in improving fat retention. We aimed to compare the feasibility and efficacy of improving fat retention in LoS patients among the ADSCs‐assisted, the stromal vascular fraction (SVF)‐assisted and conventional AFG methods. A pilot study with a 6‐month follow‐up among 18 LoS patients was conducted. Participants were randomly assigned into three AFG groups: conventional group, SVF‐assisted group, and ADSCs‐assisted group. The SVF‐assisted group received SVF‐assisted AFG at the SVF:fat ratio of 1:1. The ADSCs‐assisted group received the mixture of ADSCs‐enriched fat graft supplemented with 5 × 105 ADSCs/mL fat. Volume retention was measured by magnetic resonance imaging, and clinical photographs were taken for outcome evaluation. At sixth‐month follow‐up, the fat retention of ADSCs‐assisted group was 49.83 ± 3.61%, significantly higher than 31.75 ± 1.73% of SVF‐assisted group (P = .0004), and 21.86 ± 1.68% of the conventional group (P 
ISSN:2157-6564
2157-6580
2157-6580
DOI:10.1002/sctm.20-0419