Skip to main content
. 2022 Apr 11;22:391. doi: 10.1186/s12885-022-09485-5

Table 1.

Main characteristics of the included studies. The oncological safety of autologous fat grafting: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Author Fertsch [15] Cohen [16] Calabrese [17] Cogliandro [18] Khan [19] Krastev [20] Kronowitz [21]
Type of study Case-control Cohort Cohort Cohort Case-control Cohort Cohort
Year 2017 2017 2018 2017 2017 2019 2015
Number of patients 200 829 233 70 71 587 2364
Number of cases 100 248 105 46 32 300 1024
Age
 AFG 49.6 47,8/48,1a 48,8/50,3b 41c 49 48.1 47,7/45,8a
 No AFG 50.7 52,6/49a 47,7 41c 54 49.4 46,5
Follow up (months)
 AFG 72.5 45,6/42,5a 84/75b 30c 36 112 59,6/73,5a
 No AFG 76.5 38,8/37,6a 72 30c 36 103 43.8
Stage
 Stage 0 - AFG 9 51/NAa 5/9b NA NA 39 174/16a
 Stage 0 - no AFG 9 83/NAa 6 NA NA 40 115
 Stage 1 - AFG NA 55/NAa 16/38b NA NA 99 266/14a
 Stage 1 no AFG NA 149/NAa 26 NA NA 102 208
 Stage 2 AFG NA 46/NAa 20/17b NA NA 114 199/23a
 Stage 2 no AFG NA 143/NAa 32 NA NA 107 245
 Stage 3 AFG NA 10/NAa 0 NA NA 48 65/6a
 Stage 3 no AFG NA 39/NAa 0 NA NA 51 92
 Prophylactic surgery No No/Yes No No No No No/Yes
 Breast Reconstruction Type DIEP Tissue expander or Autologous or Implant Tissue expander + Implant Implant NA NA NA
 AFG technique Coleman Coleman Coleman + SVF Coleman Coleman Coleman NA
Author Masia [22] Stumpf [23] Sorrentino [24] Silva-Vergara [25] Seth [5] Petit DCIS [26] Petit Invasive [27] Mazur [28]
Type of study Cohort Cohort Cohort Cohort Cohort Case-control Case-control Case-control
Year 2015 2017 2019 2017 2012 2013 2012 2018
Number of patients 214 194 830 615 886 177 963 308
Number of cases 107 27 233 205 69 59 321 56
Age
 AFG 49.2 53.6 49.4 49.1 49.4 46 45 NA
 No AFG 48.9 56 51 50 48 47 46 NA
Follow up (months)
 AFG 89 36 74.1 88.7 43.6 63 56 36
 No AFG 120 36 63.8 86.8 42.1 66 57 NA
Stage
 Stage 0 - AFG 61 0 31 0 17 59 37 NA
 Stage 0 - no AFG 69 0 71 0 176 118 74 NA
 Stage 1 - AFG 23 7 94 109 23 0 174 NA
 Stage 1 no AFG 26 78 289 237 212 0 348 NA
 Stage 2 AFG 14 20 71 79 23 0 86 NA
 Stage 2 no AFG 5 89 178 135 288 0 172 NA
 Stage 3 AFG 5 0 37 11 4 0 24 NA
 Stage 3 no AFG 2 0 58 23 87 0 48 NA
 Prophylactic surgery No No No No No No No NA
 Breast Reconstruction Type

DIEP, SIEA, SGAP,

IGAP, TAP

Breast conserving surgery plus AFG NA NA NA NA NA NA
 AFG technique Coleman Coleman Coleman Coleman Coleman Coleman NA Coleman

AFG Autologous fat grafting, DIEP deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap, IGAP inferior gluteal artery perforator flap, NA not available, SGAP superior gluteal artery perforator flap, SIEA superficial inferior epigastric artery flap, SVF stromal vascular fraction, TAP thoracodorsal artery perforator flap

a in Cohen et al. and Kronowitz et at, the authors performed AFG for patients that undergone cancer surgery and prophylactic surgery. In these studies, the number on the left refers to the patients that undergone cancer surgery and the number on the right refers to the patients that undergone prophylactic surgery

b in Calabrese et al., the authors employed two modalities of AFG. The number on the left refers to the patients that undergone AFG with adipose tissue enriched with stem cells from the stromal vascular fraction. The number on the right refers to classic Coleman AFG technique

c in Cogliandro et al., the authors do not present the age and follow-up according to study groups; they only present the mean age and mean follow-up for the whole population