ArticleAesthetic surgery journal. Open forum2023
Evolution of the Push-2-Spin Fat Graft Processing Device: Enhancing Efficiency and Reducing Risk of Contamination.
Article in Aesthetic surgery journal. Open forum, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Small-volume fat graft efficiency is a critical determinant of the cost and material effectiveness of aesthetic fat grafting in the clinical space. Recent development of devices, such as the Push-2-Spin (P2S) system (Pittsburgh, PA), has improved upon the process by yielding a rapid, handheld, multi-use system to minimize operative time and mess. Objectives: In this study, the authors describe further technical innovations on the P2S prototype that improve operative ease of use, time, and safety. Methods: Abdominoplasty samples were obtained as discarded tissue. Lipoaspirate was collected utilizing a 3.0 mm liposuction cannula and processed through centrifugation (Coleman technique), gauze (telfa) rolling, mesh straining, the tabletop P2S device (prototype), or the P2S handheld (P2S-H) device. Operative processing time, spin time, oil fraction, stromal vascular fraction (SVF) yield and viability, and adipocyte viability were assessed to compare the efficacy and viability of each device/technique. Blood agar smears of lipoaspirate were performed to assess for risk of contamination. Results: The P2S-H device outperformed its prior iteration in rotary and processing speed and was significantly faster than each other technique assessed. Furthermore, the use of an inline system offered significant advantages over open-air techniques in terms of resistance to contamination. Serial use characteristics were assessed; under these conditions, oil yield as well as adipocyte and SVF number and viability was similar between all techniques. Conclusions: The technical advancements to the P2S system which enable single-unit, handheld operation significantly improve operative time and minimize space requirements. This operative quality of life improvement comes at no cost to the efficacy of oil extraction, cellular yield, or cell viability. Level of Evidence 3:
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.