Impact of Fat Graft Thickness and Harvesting Technique on Adipocyte Viability in a New Porcine Experimental Model: An Immunohistochemical Analysis

Carregando...
Imagem de Miniatura
Citações na Scopus
9
Tipo de produção
article
Data de publicação
2021
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título do Volume
Editora
OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
Autores
ARRUDA, Eduardo Gustavo Pires de
MUNHOZ, Alexandre Mendonca
MATSUMOTO, Walter
COUDRY, Renata de Almeida
CASTRO, Isac de
Citação
AESTHETIC SURGERY JOURNAL, v.41, n.6, p.NP616-NP630, 2021
Projetos de Pesquisa
Unidades Organizacionais
Fascículo
Resumo
Background: Autologous fat grafting (AFG) has been employed in surgical practice as a filling method. However, controversies remain on the specifics of this technique. So far, few relevant experimental large animal studies have objectively assessed factors related to AFG integration. Objectives: This study utilized an experimental, medium-sized animal model to compare the feasibility of AFG collected employing 2 different techniques with instruments of distinct thicknesses. Methods: Twenty minipigs (Sus scropha domesticus) were subjected to AFG harvesting via en bloc resection utilizing 3-(Group I) and 5-mm-diameter (Group II) round punch blades (PBs) and liposuction (LS) with 3- (Group III) and 5-mm-diameter cannulas (Group IV). Both samples were grafted intramuscularly (biceps femoralis). Hematoxylin and eosin staining was employed to identify intact adipocytes, fat necrosis, fibrosis, inflammation, and oil cysts. Immunohistochemical staining (perilipin-A, tumor necrosis factor alfa, and cluster of differentiation number 31) was utilized to quantify the feasibility of adipocytes, tissue necrosis, and neoangiogenesis, respectively. Results: Hematoxylin and eosin analysis showed that fat necrosis and histiocyte presence were significantly lower in the AFG harvested utilizing a PB than in LS. For perilipin-A, a statistical difference was observed between subgroups I and III (P = 0.001) and I and IV (P = 0.004). Instrument diameter had no effect on graft integration in comparisons between groups II and III (P = 0.059) and II and IV (P = 0.132). Conclusions: In this experimental study, fat collected utilizing a PB demonstrated higher adipocyte viability than fat collected with LS. The diameter of the collection instruments, whether PB or LS, had no effect on graft integration.
Palavras-chave
Referências
  1. BILLINGS E, 1989, PLAST RECONSTR SURG, V83, P368, DOI 10.1097/00006534-198902000-00033
  2. BIRCOLL M, 1987, PLAST RECONSTR SURG, V79, P267, DOI 10.1097/00006534-198702000-00022
  3. Borrelli MR, 2019, ANN PLAS SURG, V83, pS59, DOI 10.1097/SAP.0000000000002098
  4. Boschert MT, 2002, PLAST RECONSTR SURG, V109, P761, DOI 10.1097/00006534-200202000-00054
  5. CARPANEDA CA, 1994, AESTHET PLAST SURG, V18, P17, DOI 10.1007/BF00444242
  6. Chajchir A, 1996, AESTHET PLAST SURG, V20, P291, DOI 10.1007/BF00228458
  7. Cinti S, 2005, J LIPID RES, V46, P2347, DOI 10.1194/jlr.M500294-JLR200
  8. Coleman S R, 1998, Aesthet Surg J, V18, P388, DOI 10.1016/S1090-820X(98)70098-6
  9. Coleman SR, 2007, PLAST RECONSTR SURG, V119, P775, DOI 10.1097/01.prs.0000252001.59162.c9
  10. Czerny A, 1895, CHIR K VERHANDL, V2, P216
  11. DANTZER R, 1986, LAB ANIM SCI, V36, P362
  12. Del Vecchio D, 2012, PLAST RECONSTR SURG, V130, P511, DOI 10.1097/PRS.0b013e31825dbf8a
  13. Delay E, 2009, AESTHET SURG J, V29, P360, DOI 10.1016/j.asj.2009.08.010
  14. DeLisser HM, 1997, AM J PATHOL, V151, P671
  15. Erdim M, 2009, J PLAST RECONSTR AES, V62, P1210, DOI 10.1016/j.bjps.2008.03.016
  16. Eto H, 2012, PLAST RECONSTR SURG, V129, P1081, DOI 10.1097/PRS.0b013e31824a2b19
  17. Fagrell D, 1996, PLAST RECONSTR SURG, V98, P90, DOI 10.1097/00006534-199607000-00014
  18. Findlay MW, 2011, PLAST RECONSTR SURG, V128, P1206, DOI 10.1097/PRS.0b013e318230c5b2
  19. Fu Bing-Chuan, 2010, Zhonghua Zheng Xing Wai Ke Za Zhi, V26, P289
  20. Fujimaki H, 2019, REGEN THER, V11, P240, DOI 10.1016/j.reth.2019.08.004
  21. Garza RM, 2015, PLAST RECONSTR SURG, V135, P1045, DOI 10.1097/PRS.0000000000001104
  22. Gause TM, 2014, ADIPOCYTE, V3, P273, DOI 10.4161/21623945.2014.957987
  23. Gir P, 2012, PLAST RECONSTR SURG, V130, P249, DOI 10.1097/PRS.0b013e318254b4d3
  24. Guerrerosantos J, 1996, AESTHET PLAST SURG, V20, P403, DOI 10.1007/BF02390315
  25. Gutowski KA, 2009, PLAST RECONSTR SURG, V124, P272, DOI 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181a09506
  26. Hoerst K, 2019, J MOL MED, V97, P761, DOI 10.1007/s00109-019-01772-2
  27. Hong KY, 2018, PLAST RECONSTR SURG, V141, P365, DOI 10.1097/PRS.0000000000004021
  28. HORL HW, 1991, ANN PLAS SURG, V26, P248
  29. HUGHES HC, 1986, LAB ANIM SCI, V36, P348
  30. Huss FRM, 2002, SCAND J PLAST RECONS, V36, P166, DOI 10.1080/028443102753718050
  31. Idriss HT, 2000, MICROSC RES TECHNIQ, V50, P184, DOI 10.1002/1097-0029(20000801)50:3<184::AID-JEMT2>3.0.CO;2-H
  32. ILLOUZ YG, 1983, PLAST RECONSTR SURG, V72, P591, DOI 10.1097/00006534-198311000-00001
  33. ILLOUZ YG, 1988, AESTHET PLAST SURG, V12, P175, DOI 10.1007/BF01570929
  34. Ilmonen S, 1999, MELANOMA RES, V9, P273
  35. International Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, ISAPS STAT
  36. Jung DW, 2015, ANN PLAS SURG, V75, P463, DOI 10.1097/SAP.0000000000000580
  37. Kao HK, 2015, BRIT J SURG, V102, P998, DOI 10.1002/bjs.9826
  38. Karacaoglu E, 2005, ANN PLAS SURG, V55, P63, DOI 10.1097/01.sap.0000168246.75891.62
  39. Kato H, 2014, PLAST RECONSTR SURG, V133, p303E, DOI 10.1097/PRS.0000000000000066
  40. Kaufman MR, 2007, PLAST RECONSTR SURG, V119, P2287, DOI 10.1097/01.prs.0000260712.44089.e7
  41. KERRIGAN CL, 1986, LAB ANIM SCI, V36, P408
  42. Khouri R, 2009, CLIN PLAST SURG, V36, P269, DOI 10.1016/j.cps.2008.11.009
  43. Khouri RK, 2013, PLAST RECONSTR SURG, V132, P1280, DOI 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3182a4c3a9
  44. Khouri RK, 2012, PLAST RECONSTR SURG, V129, P1173, DOI 10.1097/PRS.0b013e31824a2db6
  45. Khouri RK, 2014, PRS-GLOB OPEN, V2, DOI 10.1097/GOX.0000000000000183
  46. Kirkham JC, 2012, ANN PLAS SURG, V69, P479, DOI 10.1097/SAP.0b013e31824a459f
  47. KONONAS TC, 1993, PLAST RECONSTR SURG, V91, P763, DOI 10.1097/00006534-199304001-00001
  48. Lee JW, 2015, ARCH PLAST SURG-APS, V42, P150, DOI 10.5999/aps.2015.42.2.150
  49. Livaoglu Murat, 2009, J Cutan Aesthet Surg, V2, P21, DOI 10.4103/0974-2077.53095
  50. MARQUES A, 1994, SCAND J PLAST RECONS, V28, P241, DOI 10.3109/02844319409022006
  51. Munhoz AM, 2014, WORLD J CLIN ONCOL, V5, P478, DOI 10.5306/wjco.v5.i3.478
  52. Nava MB, 2019, PRS-GLOB OPEN, V7, DOI 10.1097/GOX.0000000000002426
  53. Neuber F., 1893, ZBL CHIR, V22, P66
  54. NGUYEN A, 1990, PLAST RECONSTR SURG, V85, P378, DOI 10.1097/00006534-199003000-00007
  55. NIECHAJEV I, 1994, PLAST RECONSTR SURG, V94, P496, DOI 10.1097/00006534-199409000-00012
  56. Ozsoy Zafer, 2006, Aesthet Surg J, V26, P287, DOI 10.1016/j.asj.2006.04.003
  57. PARUMS DV, 1990, J CLIN PATHOL, V43, P752, DOI 10.1136/jcp.43.9.752
  58. de Arruda EGP, 2017, ACTA CIR BRAS, V32, P891, DOI 10.1590/s0102-865020170110000001
  59. Fraga MFP, 2008, J PLAST RECONSTR AES, V61, P1044, DOI 10.1016/j.bjps.2007.06.034
  60. Pu LLQ, 2005, ANN PLAS SURG, V54, P288, DOI 10.1097/01.sap.0000153147.23088.cb
  61. Saint-Cyr M, 2012, J RECONSTR MICROSURG, V28, P99, DOI 10.1055/s-0031-1287675
  62. Goes JCS, 2015, CLIN PLAST SURG, V42, P551, DOI 10.1016/j.cps.2015.06.017
  63. Shiffman MA, 2001, DERMATOL SURG, V27, P819, DOI 10.1046/j.1524-4725.2001.01062.x
  64. Suh A, 2019, AGEING RES REV, V54, DOI 10.1016/j.arr.2019.100933
  65. Sunaga A, 2013, PRS-GLOB OPEN, V1, DOI 10.1097/GOX.0b013e3182a7e827
  66. Swindle M. M., 1994, ILAR News, V36, P1
  67. Tansey JT, 2004, IUBMB LIFE, V56, P379, DOI 10.1080/15216540400009968
  68. Tansey JT, 2001, P NATL ACAD SCI USA, V98, P6494, DOI 10.1073/pnas.101042998
  69. Zhu M, 2015, CELL TRANSPLANT, V24, P49, DOI 10.3727/096368913X675133
  70. Zocchi ML, 2008, AESTHET PLAST SURG, V32, P313, DOI 10.1007/s00266-007-9089-3
  71. Zografou A, 2013, ANN PLAS SURG, V71, P225, DOI 10.1097/SAP.0b013e31826af01a