Anzeige
Erschienen in:
30.03.2020 | Original Article
Comparison of Volume Retention and Biocompatibility of Acellular Dermal Matrix/Hyaluronic Acid Filler to Autologous Fat Grafts in a Mouse Model
Erschienen in: Aesthetic Plastic Surgery | Ausgabe 3/2020
Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhaltenAbstract
Background
Although fat grafting has become a widely used technique in aesthetic and reconstructive surgeries, resorption is still a challenge. Micronized acellular dermal matrix (ADM) has been considered as a stable, biocompatible soft tissue coverage material that can be used as a volume filler. Here, we compared the bioacceptance and sustainability of ADM hyaluronic acid (HA) filler with human fat graft in a mouse model.
Methods
Harvested human fat and ADM/HA filler were injected randomly on the dorsal side of mice. Thirty-two mice were analyzed over a 7-week period with respect to volume, weight and microscopic evaluations with hematoxylin and eosin (H&E), epidermal growth factor (EGF) and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) staining.
Results
The volume and weight were maintained at 80% and 83%, respectively, in the ADM/HA filler group and 56.5% and 49.7%, respectively, in the fat-grafted group by the 7th week. There were no significant microscopic differences in inflammatory changes and granulation via H&E staining. At 1 and 2 weeks, EGF and VEGF immunostaining intensity scores were lower in the ADM/HA filler group. At 7 weeks, there were no significant differences in immunostaining intensity scores between the two groups.
Conclusions
During the 7-week experimental period, the ADM/HA filler showed no foreign body reaction and the proper volume was well maintained. This suggests that the ADM/HA filler can possibly be used in small amounts as an alternative to autologous fat grafts.
No Level Assigned
This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each submission to which Evidence-Based Medicine rankings are applicable. This excludes Review Articles, Book Reviews and manuscripts that concern Basic Science, Animal Studies, Cadaver Studies and Experimental Studies. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authorshttp://www.springer.com/00266.