비교

Stem Cell Fat Grafting vs SVF-assisted Fat Grafting

아래 사실은 모두 두 엔티티 페이지와 그 출처에서 가져온 것입니다. 양쪽이 함께 기록한 항목을 먼저 대조하고, 나머지는 나란히 보여 줍니다.

Stem Cell Fat GraftingA consumer and marketing term used for fat grafting that is enriched with cells isolated from adipose tissue. It is not a standardised academic term and does not denote culture-expanded stem cell therapy.갱신 2026년 9월 21일

의료

SVF-assisted Fat GraftingSVF-assisted fat grafting (a form of cell-assisted lipotransfer) enriches the fat graft with stromal vascular fraction isolated from part of the harvested fat, with the aim of improving graft survival.갱신 2026년 9월 21일

둘의 관계Stem Cell Fat Grafting — 흔히 가리키는 시술 → SVF-assisted Fat Grafting

공통 항목

양쪽 모두 기록된 항목 0개

두 항목이 공통으로 기록한 항목이 아직 없습니다. 각각의 검증된 사실은 아래에 있습니다.

각각의 사실

둘 중 한쪽에만 기록된 검증된 사실입니다.

Stem Cell Fat Grafting

아직 검증된 값이 없습니다

SVF-assisted Fat Grafting

First clinical descriptionYoshimura K et al., 'Cell-assisted lipotransfer for cosmetic breast augmentation', Aesthetic Plast Surg 2008;32(1):48–55; 40 women, maximum follow-up 42 months

Original procedureAbout half of the aspirated fat is processed to isolate fresh SVF, which is recombined with the other half before injection; the fat acts as a living scaffold

Pooled fat survival (2026 meta-analysis)72.78% with enrichment vs 45.28% conventional (SMD 2.44; 95% CI 1.00–3.88); 15 studies, 634 patients; heterogeneity I² = 97.19%

Efficacy by siteFace showed a significant benefit (SMD 2.95); breast reconstruction showed no significant advantage (SMD 0.47); no benefit with water-assisted lipotransfer harvesting

Methodological qualityAbout 62% of included studies rated weak overall; mean follow-up 16.2 months, too short for oncologic conclusions

Comparative study without benefitPeltoniemi et al. 2013 (JPRAS 66:1494–1503): 18 women, MRI at 6 months; graft survival 50% with Celution SVF enrichment vs 54% without, difference not significant

Breast-surgery evidence base11 studies, 336 patients, follow-up 6–42 months; 8 of 11 studies had no control group; only one used a validated patient-reported outcome measure (BREAST-Q)

Reported complications (breast)Calcifications were the most frequently reported complication; none reported as malignant

Preclinical and early clinical findings16 of 18 preclinical studies showed significantly improved retention (1.19- to 4.14-fold); 6 of 7 clinical studies favored CAL; evidence judged low quality

Applicable US FDA guidanceFinal guidance 'Regulatory Considerations for HCT/Ps: Minimal Manipulation and Homologous Use', July 2020 (supersedes November 2017 version)

Enzymatic SVF isolation (US)Collagenase digestion to isolate SVF falls outside 'minimal manipulation'; non-enzymatic mechanical point-of-care methods are proposed as possible alternatives

Also calledCell-assisted lipotransfer (CAL)

EvidenceA 2024 systematic review assessed the efficacy of cell-assisted lipotransfer; a 2021 study compared CAL with PRP-assisted lipotransfer

Proposed mechanismStromal cells may support angiogenesis and graft survival (hypothesis under study)