ArticleCells2025
The Influence of Sedimentation on the Composition of the Lipoaspirate and the Effects on Further Mechanical Processing.
Article in Cells, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- In Vitro Evaluation of Mechanical Fat Processing Devices: Impact on Adipocytes and Adipose-Derived Stem Cells.Stem cells international · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Manual processing of lipoaspirate can enhance stem cell concentration, thereby improving the take rate, which still represents a major challenge in autologous fat transfer. However, since the preparation consists of many manual steps that are difficult to standardize, we investigated the influence of residual tumescent solution on the macroscopic and microscopic outcome of the mechanically processed lipoaspirate. Additionally, we investigated whether sedimentation followed by vacuum filtration of the aqueous phase could accelerate processing by replacing the initial centrifugation step. Samples with more than 5% remaining aqueous phase show no clearly defined oil phase, preventing any volume reduction. In contrast, all centrifuged samples produced a clear oil phase. The remaining tissue, as confirmed by both histology and viability assays, was superior to nanofat. Although sedimentation and filtration in the LipoCollector did not sufficiently separate enough aqueous phase from the lipoaspirate, tissue viability was significantly higher compared to our control container. Our findings indicate that centrifugation remains essential for effective aqueous phase separation and further mechanical processing, while the automatic filtration may enhance processing efficiency. These results indicate that further work is needed to simplify mechanical processing, as the outcome can be significantly influenced by parameters such as tumescent impurities.
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.