ArticleAesthetic plastic surgery2026
Effect of Acellular Adipose Matrix on Wound Regeneration in a Murine Model.
Article in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundChronic and acute wounds pose major challenges in clinical practice. Current treatments offer therapeutic benefits but are limited by high cost, technical complexity, and limited availability. The acellular adipose matrix (AAM), derived from decellularized human adipose tissue, contains extracellular matrix components and bioactive molecules that may promote tissue repair and angiogenesis. In this study, we evaluated the therapeutic potential of AAM in promoting wound healing in a murine model.
methodsHuman abdominal adipose tissue was processed into AAM through mechanical, chemical, and enzymatic decellularization. Bilateral full-thickness dorsal wounds (1 cm in diameter) were created in nude mice. The control group received an antibiotic ointment, while the experimental group received AAM. Wound closure was monitored for 16 days. Histological and immunofluorescence analyses were performed to assess epithelialization, collagen remodeling, and angiogenesis. Statistical analysis was performed using the Mann-Whitney U test, with p < 0.05 considered significant.
resultsThe AAM-treated group exhibited faster epithelial coverage and granulation tissue formation than the control group. The mean healing time was significantly shorter in the AAM group (9.0 ± 1.67 days) compared with controls (12.0 ± 1.79 days). CD31 staining confirmed the presence of dense microvascular networks and significantly enhanced angiogenesis. Collagen fibers were evenly organized without abnormal fibrosis in both groups.
conclusionsAAM effectively enhanced wound regeneration and angiogenesis in vivo. Its biological activity, accessibility, and potential for cost-effective production suggest that AAM may serve as a clinically applicable "off-the-shelf" biomaterial for wound management in both reconstructive and aesthetic surgeries. NO LEVEL ASSIGNED: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each submission to which Evidence-Based Medicine rankings are applicable. This excludes Review Articles, Book Reviews, and manuscripts that concern Basic Science, Animal Studies, Cadaver Studies, and Experimental Studies. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
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.