ArticleAesthetic surgery journal2018
A Single-Blind Study Evaluating the Efficacy of Gold Nanoparticle Photothermal-Assisted Liposuction in an Ex Vivo Human Tissue Model.
Article in Aesthetic surgery journal, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Skin Microbiome, Nanotoxicology, and Regulatory Gaps: Chronic Cosmetic Exposure and Skin Barrier Dysfunction-A Systematic Review.Pharmaceutics · 2025Review
- Plasmonic Magnesium Nanoparticles Are Efficient Nanoheaters.Nano letters · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLiposuction is one of the most performed cosmetic surgery procedures. In a previously reported study, gold-nanoparticle (GNP) laser-assisted liposuction (NanoLipo) was shown to improve procedure parameters and outcomes in a porcine model.
objectivesAn ex vivo human liposuction model was developed to assess the ease, efficacy, and outcomes of NanoLipo, and to further explore its mechanism of action in facilitating liposuction.
methodsNanoLipo was compared to a control without GNPs in sets of fresh, nonperfused, anatomically symmetric, matched tissue specimens from 12 patients. A subset of three experiments was performed under single-blinded conditions. Intraoperative assessments included lipoaspirate volume, percentage of free oil, ease of removal, and temperature rise. Specimens were palpated, visualized for evenness, and graded with and without skin. Postoperative assessment included viability staining of the lipoaspirate and remaining tissues. Microcomputed tomography was used to assess the distribution of infused GNPs within the tissues.
resultsNanoLipo consistently removed more adipose tissue with more liberated triglycerides compared to control. NanoLipo specimens were smoother, thinner, and had fewer and smaller irregularities. Infused solutions preferentially distributed between fibrous membranes and fat pearls. After NanoLipo, selective structural-tissue disruptions, indicated by loss of metabolic activity, were observed. Thus, NanoLipo likely creates a bimodal mechanism of action whereby fat lobules are dislodged from surrounding fibro-connective tissue, while lipolysis is simultaneously induced.
conclusionsNanoLipo showed many advantages compared to control under blinded and nonblinded conditions. This technology may be promising in facilitating fat removal. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE 5:
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.