A Prospective, Randomized Comparison of Clinical Outcomes with Different Processing Techniques in Autologous Fat Grafting

被引:10
|
作者
Hanson, Summer E.
Garvey, Patrick B.
Chang, Edward, I
Reece, Gregory P.
Liu, Jun
Baumann, Donald P.
Butler, Charles E.
机构
[1] Univ Chicago, Dept Surg, Med & Biol Sci, Chicago, IL 60637 USA
[2] Univ Texas MD Anderson Canc Ctr, Dept Plast Surg, Houston, TX 77030 USA
关键词
BREAST RECONSTRUCTION; ONCOLOGIC SAFETY; COMPLICATIONS; INJECTION; TRENDS; RATES;
D O I
10.1097/PRS.0000000000009613
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Autologous fat grafting is a useful tool in breast reconstruction. The authors have previously demonstrated a difference in the rate of processing adipose grafts in a randomized time and motion clinical trial. The purpose of this study was to compare clinical outcomes in commonly used grafting systems. Methods: Three methods to prepare adipose grafts were compared: a passive washing filtration system (Puregraft system), an active washing filtration system (Revolve system), and centrifugation (Coleman technique). Postoperative complications, rates of fat necrosis, revision procedures, and additional imaging were recorded. Results: Forty-six patients were included in the prospective, randomized study (15 active filtration, 15 passive filtration, and 16 centrifugation). Their mean age was 54 years and mean body mass index was 28.6 kg/m2. The mean length of follow-up was 16.9 +/- 4 months. The overall complication rate was 12.1 percent. The probability of fat necrosis was no different between the groups (active filtration, 15 percent versus passive filtration, 14.3 percent] versus centrifugation, 8 percent; p = 0.72). Fat necrosis was highest in patients with breast conservation before grafting (60 percent; p = 0.011). There was no significant difference in contour irregularity (active filtration, 40 percent versus passive filtration, 38 percent versus centrifugation, 36 percent; p = 0.96) or additional grafting (active filtration, 40 percent versus passive filtration, 24 percent versus centrifugation, 32 percent; p = 0.34). Conclusions: This is the first prospective, randomized study to compare clinical outcomes of adipose graft preparation. There was no significant difference in early complications, fat necrosis, or rates of additional grafting among the study groups. There was significantly higher risk of fat necrosis in patients with previous breast conservation treatment regardless of processing technique. (Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 150: 955, 2022.) CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, II.
引用
收藏
页码:955 / 962
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Autologous fat grafting: Comparison of techniques
    Markey, AC
    Glogau, RG
    DERMATOLOGIC SURGERY, 2000, 26 (12) : 1135 - 1139
  • [2] Review Achieving optimal clinical outcomes in autologous fat grafting: A systematic review of processing techniques
    Langridge, B. J.
    Jasionowska, S.
    Khan, H.
    Awad, L.
    Turner, B. R. H.
    Varghese, J.
    Butler, P. E. M.
    JOURNAL OF PLASTIC RECONSTRUCTIVE AND AESTHETIC SURGERY, 2023, 81 : 9 - 25
  • [3] A Prospective Pilot Study Comparing Rate of Processing Techniques in Autologous Fat Grafting
    Hanson, Summer E.
    Garvey, Patrick B.
    Chang, Edward I.
    Reece, Gregory
    Liu, Jun
    Butler, Charles E.
    AESTHETIC SURGERY JOURNAL, 2019, 39 (03) : 331 - 337
  • [4] Autologous Fat Grafting for Pedal Fat Pad Atrophy: A Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial
    Gusenoff, Jeffrey A.
    Mitchell, Ryan T.
    Jeong, Kwonho
    Wukich, Dane K.
    Gusenoff, Beth R.
    PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2016, 138 (05) : 1099 - 1108
  • [5] A PROSPECTIVE, RANDOMIZED TIME-AND-MOTION STUDY COMPARING RATE OF PROCESSING TECHNIQUES IN AUTOLOGOUS FAT GRAFTING: AN ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
    Parekh, M.
    Hanson, S. E.
    Garvey, P. B.
    Chang, E., I
    Reece, G.
    Baumann, D. P.
    Liu, J.
    Macarios, D.
    Butler, C. E.
    VALUE IN HEALTH, 2018, 21 : S252 - S252
  • [6] A Randomized Prospective Time and Motion Comparison of Techniques to Process Autologous Fat Grafts
    Hanson, Summer E.
    Garvey, Patrick B.
    Chang, Edward I.
    Reece, Gregory P.
    Liu, Jun
    Baumann, Donald P.
    Butler, Charles E.
    PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2021, 147 (05) : 1035 - 1044
  • [7] O056 Achieving optimal clinical outcomes in autologous fat grafting (AFG): a systematic review of processing techniques
    Langridge, B.
    Khan, H.
    Awad, L.
    Mosahebi, A.
    Butler, P. E. M.
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2022, 109 (SUPPL 4)
  • [8] Autologous fat grafting: Harvesting techniques
    Fontes, Tomas
    Brandao, Ines
    Negrao, Rita
    Martins, Maria Joao
    Monteiro, Rosario
    ANNALS OF MEDICINE AND SURGERY, 2018, 36 : 212 - 218
  • [9] Quality and Vitality of Autologous Fat Grafts Harvested by Different Techniques: A Clinical Comparison Study
    Luze, Hanna
    Einsiedler, Johanna
    Nischwitz, Sebastian Philipp
    Winter, Raimund
    Kolb, Dagmar
    Kamolz, Lars-Peter
    Kotzbeck, Petra
    Rappl, Thomas
    AESTHETIC SURGERY JOURNAL, 2022, 42 (12) : 1416 - 1424
  • [10] Assessing Clinical Outcomes in Autologous Fat Grafting: A Current Literature Review
    Moak, Teri N.
    Ebersole, Trina G.
    Tandon, Damini
    Tenenbaum, Marissa
    AESTHETIC SURGERY JOURNAL, 2021, 41 : S50 - S60