ReviewAesthetic surgery journal. Open forum2025
The Effectiveness of Nanofat in the Management of Skin Scars: A Systematic Review.
Review in Aesthetic surgery journal. Open forum, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Boosting the vascularization and regenerative capacity of nanofat by short-term ex vivo pretreatment with erythropoietin.Journal of translational medicine · 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
Nanofat is an adipose tissue product obtained through mechanical emulsification, preserving stromal vascular fraction and extracellular matrix. Nanofat has been primarily investigated in the contexts of skin scar repair. This systematic review assesses existing evidence on the effectiveness of nanofat for various skin scar types. In this systematic review, we aim to evaluate the effectiveness of nanofat injections in improving skin scars compared with controls, considering clinical, radiographical, histological, and histomorphometrical outcomes. This systematic review was conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Databases including MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched from January 2013 through March 2025. Studies involving human patients receiving nanofat for scar treatment were included. Risk-of-bias assessments were performed by the Cochrane RoB 2 tool for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and the NIH Quality Assessment Tool for Pre-Post Studies lacking control groups. Of 415 identified publications, 12 studies were included, comprising 5 RCTs and 7 pre-post intervention studies. Participant numbers ranged from 12 to 48. Most studies reported substantial short-term improvements in scar appearance, texture, and patient satisfaction. Histologically, findings indicated increased skin thickness, improved neovascularization, and collagen deposition. However, 2 high-quality RCTs showed no sustained significant benefits beyond 12 months. Few minor complications were documented; no serious adverse events occurred. Overall, nanofat injections appear to be an effective, minimally invasive treatment for skin scars, particularly in the short term. Nonetheless, the long-term benefits are less certain, underscoring the importance of conducting further research by standardized protocols and extended follow-up periods to confirm these findings.
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.