Trial reportPlastic and reconstructive surgery2026
Efficacy of Nanofat in Wound Healing: A Double-Blinded Randomized Controlled Trial.
Trial report in Plastic and reconstructive surgery, 2026. 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.
- Autologous Extracellular Matrix-Based Cell-Free Therapy for Tissue Regeneration Through Trem2Exploration (Beijing, China) · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNanofat has been shown to contain a variety of growth factors, antiinflammatory mediators, and adipose-derived stem cells, all of which may significantly contribute to the wound healing process. However, there is limited comparative clinical evidence supporting its use. This study aims to evaluate the effects of nanofat on wound healing in abdominoplasty by comparing outcomes between nanofat-treated and -nontreated wounds.
methodsA double-blinded randomized controlled trial was conducted using a split-wound model. Each wound was divided and randomized into a nanofat-treated side and a nonnanofat-treated control side. Nanofat was prepared and injected along the wound margins using a standardized dose. Both patients and the surgeons evaluating the wounds were blinded to the treatment allocation. Wound outcomes were assessed 6 months postoperatively using the Observer Scale of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale.
resultsFifty lipoabdominoplasty patients were included in the study. Wound outcomes were significantly better in the nanofat group compared with the nonnanofat group across all assessed parameters, including vascularity, pigmentation, thickness, relief, pliability, surface area, and overall opinion ( P < 0.001). No oil cysts or fat necrosis were observed in the nanofat group.
conclusionNanofat significantly improved wound outcomes in abdominoplasty patients without associated complications such as oil cysts or fat necrosis.
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.