Doctor, University College Dublin (2009)
Stem cells are attractive candidates for the development of novel therapies, targeting indications that involve functional restoration of defective tissue. Although most stem cell therapies are new and highly experimental, there are clinics around the world that exploit vulnerable patients with the hope of offering supposed stem cell therapies, many of which operate without credible scientific merit, oversight, or other patient protection.We review the potential, as well as drawbacks, for incorporation of stem cells in cosmetic procedures. A review of FDA-approved indications and ongoing clinical trials with adipose stem cells is provided. Furthermore, a "snapshot" analysis of websites using the search terms "stem cell therapy" or "stem cell treatment" or "stem cell facelift" was performed.Despite the protective net cast by regulatory agencies such as the FDA and professional societies such as the American Society of Plastic Surgeons, we are witnessing worrying advertisements for procedures such as stem cell facelifts, stem cell breast augmentations, and even stem cell vaginal rejuvenation. The marketing and promotion of stem cell procedures in aesthetic surgery is not adequately supported by clinical evidence in the majority of cases.Stem cells offer tremendous potential, but the marketplace is saturated with unsubstantiated and sometimes fraudulent claims that may place patients at risk. With plastic surgeons at the forefront of stem cell-based regenerative medicine, it is critically important that we provide an example of a rigorous approach to research, data collection, and advertising of stem cell therapies.
View details for DOI 10.1097/PRS.0000000000000404
View details for PubMedID 24732654
Fat grafting has become increasingly popular for the correction of soft tissue deficits at many sites throughout the body. Long-term outcomes, however, depend on delivery of fat in the least traumatic fashion to optimize viability of the transplanted tissue. In this study, we compare the biologic properties of fat following injection using two methods.Lipoaspiration samples were obtained from five female donors and cellular viability, proliferation, and lipolysis were evaluated following injection using either a modified Coleman technique or an automated, low shear device. Comparisons were made to minimally processed, uninjected fat. Volume retention was also measured over twelve weeks following injection of fat under the scalp of immunodeficient mice using either the modified Coleman technique or the Adipose Tissue Injector. Finally, fat grafts were analyzed histologically.Fat viability and cellular proliferation were both significantly greater with the Adipose Tissue Injector relative to injection with the modified Coleman technique. In contrast, significantly less lipolysis was noted using the automated device. In vivo fat volume retention was significantly greater than with the modified Coleman technique at 4, 6, 8, and 12 week time points. This corresponded with significantly greater histological scores for healthy fat and lower scores for injury following injection with the device.Biological properties of injected tissues reflect how disruptive and harmful techniques for placement of fat may be, and our in vitro and in vivo data both support the use of the automated, low shear devices compared to the modified Coleman technique.
View details for DOI 10.1097/PRS.0000000000000290
View details for PubMedID 24622574
Although fat grafting can address many soft-tissue deficits, results remain inconsistent. In this study, the authors compared physical properties of fat following injection using an automated, low-shear device or the modified Coleman technique.Lipoaspirate was obtained from nine patients and processed for injection using either a modified Coleman technique or an automated, low-shear device. Fat was passed through a 2-mm cannula and compared with minimally processed fat. A rheometer was used to measure the storage modulus and shear rate at which tissues began to lose their solid-like properties. Viscosity was also measured, and gross properties of treatment groups were evaluated qualitatively with a glass slide test.Fat injected through an automated, low-shear device closely matched physical properties of minimally processed fat. The storage modulus (G') of fat for the device group was greater than for the modified Coleman group, and the onset of breakdown was delayed. Similarly, viscosity measurement of fat from the automated device closely matched minimally processed fat and was greater than that of othe modified Coleman group.The physical properties of lipoaspirate processed using an automated, low-shear device with a 2-mm cannula preserved the intactness of fat more than the modified Coleman technique. The authors' rheologic data demonstrate less damage using an automated device compared with the modified Coleman technique and potentially support its use for improved fat graft integrity.
View details for DOI 10.1097/PRS.0000000000000289
View details for PubMedID 25028817