Skip to main content
. 2019 Dec 30;14(2):369–387. doi: 10.1002/term.2999

Table 3.

An outline of the main significant clinical trials found in the literature

Reference Conventional Therapy and Indications (I) Regenerative Therapy No. of patients (no) Age (y, years) Follow‐up (months) Results (Phase 1) Results (Phase II) Complications (operative and in the follow‐up period) Evaluation methods of the results
(Domenis et al., 2015) ‐Autologous fat grafting (A), breast reconstruction, breast tissue contour correctionI: Breast augmentation e‐SVF (Enriched Stromal Vascular Fraction) fat grafting (B)

no.36:16 (A, control group)20 (B, experimental group)

y. 21–71 (A)19–74 (B)

12 Long‐term augmentation effectDose: ≃106 cells per milliliter of harvested fat tissue Thicker fat layer around the mammary gland None Ultrasonography imaging
(Dos Anjos, Matas‐Palau, Mercader, Katz, & Llull, 2015)

‐Autologous fat grafting

‐Breast reconstruction, breast volume restoration

I: Breast augmentation, breast cancer stage I to III

e‐SVF fat grafting no.77 fat grafting:21 (control group, low dose of SVF), 56 (experimental group,high dose of SVF) y. 18–61 18 75% and 50% breast volume retention in high and low e‐SVF groups, respectively Dose: >2 × 105 cells per mL of harvested fat tissue (high e‐SVF group); <5 × 104 cells per milliliter of harvested fat tissue (low e‐SVF group) Decrease in the early postsurgical breast edema; Improvement of long‐term volume retention Mondor's diseasenine cases of subcutaneous benign lumps. 14 oil cysts; No intraoperative complications Imaging 3‐D, 3‐D scanner, superimposed to measure difference.
(Gentile et al., 2012)

‐Autologous fat grafting (A)

‐Breast reconstruction, correction of contour and volume defects

I: Breast cancer stage I to III

e‐SVF fat grafting (B), fat grafting with PRP (Platelet‐rich plasma) (C) no.10 (A,C control group)n.13 (B,C experimentalgroups) y. 19–65 30 No microcalcifications No local tumor recurrence Dose: 200 mL average fat grafting for each breast. 5 × 104 SVF per milliliter of harvested fat tissue (B); 0,.5 ml of PRP per milliliter of harvested fat tissue More natural breast contour and softness; Higher augmentation effect; Minor volume loss None Team evaluation; Patient self‐evaluation
(Kamakura & Ito, 2011)

‐Autologous fat grafting

‐Breast augmentation

I: Breast augmentation

Autologous adipose‐derived regenerative cells no.20 Single‐Arm study. y. 21–52 12 Enhanced augmentation effect Dose: 240 ml average fat grafting for each breast; 3.42 × 105 cells per gram of harvested fat tissue Increase in the circumferential breast measurement (BRM) Cyst formation in two patients Volumetric measurements
(Pérez‐Cano et al., 2012)

‐Breast conserving therapy (BCT)

‐Breast tissue contour correction

I: Breast augmentation, breast cancer stage I to III

ADSC no.12 Single‐Arm study. y. 37–68 12 Permanent augmentation effectNo local tumor recurrenceNo post‐operative complicationsDose: 140 ml average fat grafting for each breast; 2.95 × 105 ADRCs per milliliter of harvested fat tissue Improvement in breast contour defects; More natural breast shape; Reduction in scar tethering None MRI imaging; Ultrasonography imaging; Likert Scale for the evaluation of breast defect and contour
(Yoshimura et al., 2010)

‐Mastectomy

‐Breast reconstruction or augmentation

I: Breast augmentation

e‐SVF fat grafting no.15 Single‐Arm study. y. 35–50 12 No microcalcifications Minimal volume lossPreservation of the fat tissueDose: 264 ml average fat grafting for each breast; 9.7 ± 1.7 × 107 stromal vascular cells per liter of fat tissue More natural breast softness; Symmetry; Thicker fat layer around the mammary gland Slight post‐operative atrophy; Few cysts (<5 mm) MRI imaging; Mammography; Photography; Videography; 3‐D imaging

Note . The letter “I” in the first column indicates the case in which the proposed approaches are clinically eligible.

Abbreviations: ADRC, adipose‐derived regenerative cell; ADSCs, adipose‐derived stem cells; SVF, stromal vascular fraction.