Close
New

Medscape is available in 5 Language Editions – Choose your Edition here.

 

Facial Fat Grafting Treatment & Management

  • Author: Thomas J Gampper, MD, FACS; Chief Editor: Mark S Granick, MD, FACS  more...
 
Updated: May 05, 2015
 

Medical Therapy

Skin care regimens such as glycolic acid peels (mini-peels) and at-home products such as glycolic acid lotions and Retin-A–type products are useful adjuncts for the treatment of facial aging. Other management options for the treatment of rhytids include traditional lifting procedures such as facelifts and brow lifts as well as chemical peels, laser resurfacing, and dermabrasion.[11] Often these modalities can be used in conjunction with fat grafting.

Next

Surgical Therapy

The most important principle in the surgical management is the atraumatic transfer of fat. Trauma to fat in the process of harvesting or placing fat affects the survival of the graft. While a nonviable graft initially may appear to have corrected the problem, eventual resorption of the tissue negates the result. Any blood that remains in the harvested fat also facilitates rapid degradation of the transplanted lipograft. The 3 parts of the surgery are harvesting the graft, transferring the graft, and placing the graft.

Previous
Next

Preoperative Details

First, carefully mark the recipient site(s) with the patient's agreement while he or she is in the upright position. Sterilely prepare and drape both the harvest site and the recipient site.

Previous
Next

Intraoperative Details

Harvest

The technique is designed to harvest the fat in parcels of readily transferable size. Common donor sites include periumbilical, lumbar, and trochanteric areas; the thigh; and medial sites of the knee and arm.

Use local anesthesia to anesthetize the site for a small access incision. Through this incision, use a long syringe to introduce tumescent fluid for anesthesia of the region. The same site serves as the access for harvesting.

The choice of tumescent fluid varies. A standard solution consists of 1 mg of epinephrine, 200 mg of lidocaine, and 5 mEq of sodium bicarbonate in 1 L of normal saline. Dosages of lidocaine up to 35 mg/kg can be used for the tumescent technique, although substantially less is required for simple fat harvesting.

Following infiltration of the region to be harvested, use an aspiration cannula (eg, Mercedes) connected to a syringe. Alternatively, a 14-ga needle can be used, as this causes no reduction in survival of fat harvested. Suction by hand or with a mechanical vacuum. Use a gentle passing motion for aspiration. Small syringes are recommended to avoid creation of negative pressures greater than 1 atm. Increasing the power suction from -0.5 atm to -0.95 atm has been experimentally demonstrated to result in the breakage and vaporization of fat cells, destroying their ability to be successfully transplanted.[12]

For visible tarsal plates and tear-trough or nasojugal fold improvements, a combination of pearl fat grafting and sparse fat injection may provide optimal results. Pioneered by Ellenbogen, this technique employs small pearls (5-8 mm in diameter) excised from fat and placed in saline. These pearls are then stacked on top of each other through an incision in the depressed area.[2] This technique is not useful for nasolabial folds, labiomandibular folds, or chin augmentation.

Transfer and purification

Once harvesting is complete, the aspirate then is transferred sterilely through multiple syringes using the tulip connections to 1-mL tuberculin syringes. The liquid fraction of the graft is gently washed free of oil, lidocaine, and blood with this transfer.

An alternative to gentle hand tipping is use of the centrifuge. Although Chajchir found that use of the centrifuge machine at high or low speed completely destroyed the adipose cells,[13, 14] other groups have reported good results with use of the centrifuge. The aspirate divides into 3 layers. The top layer is free oil from ruptured fat cells. This layer is decanted or blotted gently. The bottom layer contains variable amounts of tumescent fluid and blood and is drained. The middle layer consists of fat cells for grafting. More vigorous washing or straining may damage the fragile cells and decrease the viability of the graft.

A study by Gerth et al indicated that in autologous facial fat grafting, the long-term retention of fat processed via closed-membrane filtration is significantly greater than that for centrifuge-processed fat. The study, which included 26 patients who underwent grafting with closed-membrane filtration fat, found that at a mean follow-up period of 17 months, the mean retention rate for these patients was over 41%, compared with 31.8% for patients who had undergone grafting with centrifuge-processed fat.[15]

Inspired by a yogurt concentration method used in Anatolia, Kuran had recent success transferring aspirated fat to a sterile cup dressed with gauze.[16] Five washes of lactated Ringer solution rinses local anesthetic solution and blood from the fat. The aspirate is left to dry and the concentrated product is transferred to small syringes. Most groups favor a closed technique for sterility issues, but no published data exist for higher risk of infections in open procedures. The advantage of open technique is the option that allows the surgeon to manipulate fat to produce a graft that is easier to inject.

The choice of fluid for fat suspension is controversial. Most commonly, normal saline or lactated Ringer solution is used. Serum free culture medium is also available, although it is more expensive. Some groups advocate additives such as heparin, insulin, vitamin E, and nonsteroidal anabolic hormones. The contribution of lidocaine is also debatable.

In anticipation of future lipografts, adipocytes may be frozen to -30°C and reused. A high number of viable cells exist even after defrosting. Slow freezing and thawing is the method of choice to retain the maximal number of live cells.

Placement

Regional nerve blocks are the most useful because adequate anesthesia can be provided without obscuring the defect to be treated.

The goal with any grafting procedure is to gently apply the graft to a well-vascularized bed to maximize graft take. Every part of the graft should be within 1.5 mm of living, vascularized tissue. If a large area is grafted, the central area, which is most removed from the blood supply, may not survive. Still, some clinical evidence shows good lipografting survival in some tissues that are not well-vascularized (ie, hemifacial hemiatrophy and posttraumatic scars).

Creating small tracks for the grafts helps keep the grafted fat adherent to the recipient site. Keeping the tracks independent prevents the fat from leaking out of the tunnel. Also take care to avoid overfilling the track. Overfilling can adversely affect graft survival and graft location.

Insert the cannula either over a bevel-tipped needle or through a 1-2–mm access incision made by a No. 11 blade scalpel. Guide the needle or cannula superficially under the rhytid or scar and inject fat in a controlled method gently upon withdrawal. Slight overcorrection is important because some absorption of the liquid carrier occurs. Some groups recommend a 30% overcorrection.

The level of fat grafting varies with the structure being augmented. Fat is grafted from the deep layer to the superficial layer.

Kuran's technique calls for injection in parallel and crossing directions and at subcutaneous, intramuscular, and supraperiosteal levels for malar, buccal, and mental areas. Injections are only made parallel to the line for correction of rhytids and prominent nasolabial folds.[16]

With lip augmentation, grafting near the mucosa increases the amount of vermilion show. Grafting near the white roll tightens perioral rhytids. Gatti describes injection of 3 mL into the upper lip and 4 mL into the lower lip, although much larger amounts have been reported.[17]

Serial injection may be performed at 3-month intervals. Generally, 3 procedures should be anticipated. Even distribution of the injection is crucial. Excess bulk in a particular area may isolate the fat in the central region from the new blood supply.

A study by Lin et al indicated that microautologous fat transplantation (MAFT) is an effective means of accurately grafting small fat parcels. The study involved 168 patients who underwent the procedure for sunken upper eyelids, with satisfactory results obtained, suggesting that MAFT can be used to reduce the potential complications of fat grafting.[18]

Previous
Next

Postoperative Details

Discourage massage and excessive facial animation immediately following fat grafting. These restrictions are to prevent migration of fat away from the desired areas of treatment.

Compression dressings to prevent migration have been described; however, they are often difficult to maintain and probably add little to the final result. If the fat has been placed in an appropriate tunnel, minimal concern about migration should exist.

Previous
Next

Follow-up

Patients should be seen in the first week postoperatively to check the donor and recipient sites. Some edema and a minimal amount of bruising may be apparent; reassure patients.

An additional follow-up appointment should be made for approximately 6-8 weeks. At this point, most of the edema has subsided, and early results can be assessed.

If a repeat procedure is to be performed, a waiting period of 3 months is prudent to allow the first graft to re-vascularize and to allow any edema to resolve.

Previous
Next

Complications

The major complications of fat grafting are undercorrection and overcorrection. Undercorrection can be the result of the placement of less than the required amount of fat or from the resorption of some of the graft.

Although placing too little fat obviously fails to correct the defect, increasing the amount of injected fat does not always prevent problems. Placing too much fat in a particular area can contribute to failure of revascularization of the graft. Graft necrosis may cause palpable irregularities and eventual disappearance of the grafted material. Graft migration is usually caused by infiltrating too much fat into a particular site. The graft either is forced into an undesirable area or succumbs to pressure and lack of blood supply.

When grafting scarred areas, the graft tends to move to the areas of least tension. Clumping of the graft also may occur. This may be a particular problem under thin skin. After 1 month, if clumping is still a problem, instruct the patient on how to perform scar massage.

Undercorrection is generally easier to treat than overcorrection. Additional fat may be grafted at a separate sitting to complete the correction. Removing excess graft is more difficult as the host tissue infiltrates into the graft.

Damage to underlying structures, particularly around the eye, is possible and generally is prevented using the blunt needle for infiltration. Coleman reported a case of parotid injury when grafting a scar adherent to the parotid. Sharp needles were used. Niechajev and Sevcuk reviewed complications and discovered 4 cases of unilateral blindness and 1 case of severe damage to the CNS.[12] All of these cases involved treating glabellar frown lines with probable resultant fat embolism. Careful control of the injection to keep the fat in superficial areas as well as use of the blunt cannula should prevent these complications.

Edema usually is evident for 2 weeks after the procedure; however, as with any procedure, prolonged edema is possible and troubling to the patient.

Bleeding complications usually are limited to transient mild ecchymosis and are associated with the use of sharp needles for fat injection. Superficial ecchymosis tends to resorb rapidly. Small hematomas are more unusual and are associated with the use of sharp needles for graft placement.

Although rare, infections can occur wherever the skin envelope is violated. The most common source of infection is the oral mucosa.

Additionally, donor site scarring is a potential concern. Contour irregularities can result from overly aggressive harvesting in a small area.

Previous
Next

Outcome and Prognosis

The major questions regarding fat grafting are how much of the graft survives and for how long. Many groups have reported on the fate of grafted fat; however, solid quantitative results have been difficult to establish. In addition to the variations in technique of fat grafting, quantifying the results objectively has been nearly impossible. Biopsy of the areas has been performed but is not a palatable option in the cosmetic patient. Further, while histology may demonstrate the integration of the graft, the relative volume retained remains unknown.[19]

Imaging studies, such as MRI, may yield information in a noninvasive manner; however, such studies are quite expensive and inconvenient for the patient. Also, many of these patients undergo additional procedures either simultaneously or at a later date, which may confound the results. Individual variation in aging is another uncontrollable factor, although many studies reporting poor long-term results have been published. Surgeons who routinely perform fat grafting counter that failure to maintain meticulous technique accounts for the shortcomings.

Two major theories describe the survival of grafted fat. Peer proposed the host cell replacement theory.[20] Histiocytes phagocytize free fat and become adipocytes. This idea largely has been replaced by the cell survival theory. Circulation is restored to the grafted fat cells in a manner similar to the revascularization of a skin graft. In the first 4 days, host cells, such as polymorphonuclear leukocytes (PMNs), plasma cells, lymphocytes, and eosinophils, infiltrate the graft. Within the vessels of the graft, red and white blood cells are clumped. On or about the fourth day, neovascularization is evident. Histiocytes act only to remove fat from broken down, nonsurviving, or disrupted cells.

Chajchir et al performed biopsies on the sites of grafted fat at intervals. Three months after transfer, zones of cytosteatonecrosis, lipophagic granulomas, lymphocytes, adipocytes, giant multinucleated cells, and new vessels were found. At 6-8 months, the specimens were infiltrated heavily by PMNs in a fibrotic matrix, and, at 1 year, a large amount of connective tissue and fibrotic reaction was present. Some fat was still present, but the authors felt that the inflammatory reaction may contribute more to the long-term result.

The key points of the theory of fat survival are (1) fat is a dynamic tissue and (2) cells that suffer trauma lose more volume. Therefore, careful handling of the graft is critical. Scarring and the added bulk of reactive tissue may contribute to the anticipated result.

Moore et al reported on the effects of mechanical damage to fat cells harvested with syringe suction lipectomy versus excision with local anesthetics.[21] The mechanical damage to tissue aspirated versus tissue that was excised was unchanged. Lidocaine inhibited the glucose metabolism and lipolysis of adipocytes in culture. The effect was maintained only for as long as the lidocaine was present.

Also, as Smahel reported, fat grafts, like other grafts, must be small enough to be revascularized but large enough to maintain structural integrity and some native blood vessels.[22] When part of the graft is not revascularized, the fat becomes necrotic and is not simply resorbed but is broken up and removed by the cellular elements.

Outcomes of early studies yielded disappointing results.

A 1991 report by Ersek revealed a 3-year follow-up period of fat grafting that was disappointing; however, although the fat was harvested atraumatically using a blunt cannula and minimal vacuum, the fat was processed in a traumatic manner using a whisk and strainer.[23] The range of fat resorption was reported at 20-90%. Cortese et al reported resorption of 75-98% of the graft, but some good results were obtained with multiple procedures.[24]

The techniques of grafting fat have changed markedly since these studies were performed. Niechajev and Sevcuk reported long-term results of fat transplantation clinically and histologically.[12] Fat harvested by low-power aspiration was used. Patients were overcorrected by approximately 50% at the time of the initial procedure. Only partial resorption had occurred 1.5-4.5 years postoperatively. The clinical impression was that 40-50% of the result was maintained long-term. Histologic sampling at 7-36 months revealed fat cells in an organized structure. Longer-lived specimens demonstrated more pronounced fibrosis and organized connective tissue. The size of the graft was demonstrated to increase with overall weight gain by the patient.

Bertossi reported on the histology of biopsy specimens from the upper lip of 99 patients.[25] Upon examination, the structure of the transplanted adipocytes was well-preserved. In some areas, connective tissue was dense and organized; in other areas, adipocytes and reactive cells with increased vasculature were in higher abundance.

Coleman reported long-term success when the treated rhytid was compared with a control rhytid.[26] Patients were monitored clinically with careful photographic controls for 6.5 years. However, ongoing aging and choice of control rhytid can affect the interpretation of results.

Koh et al showed that patients who received adipose-derived stem cells and fat grafts had less fat absorption than those who received fat grafts alone.[27] They measured fat absorption and volumetric differences using a 3-dimensional camera and 3-dimensional computed tomography.[27]

Clearly, the results depend on the technique used for the procedure and on the method of measuring results. Advances in digital photography aid in long-term follow-up care and documentation. Presently, clinical impressions and patient satisfaction support the use of fat grafting in many different situations.[25]

Previous
Next

Future and Controversies

Fat grafting has become a popular procedure for facial reconstruction and rejuvenation. The long-term results remain debatable. Standardized digital photography may allow more precise quantification of long-term results in a noninvasive manner.

Fat grafting for breast enhancement remains a controversial issue. Clinical trials assessing the long-term efficacy and safety are currently underway. Concerns include the low survival rates of adipocytes after implantation and the difficulties in differentiating calcifications due to breast cancer from calcifications due to fat transfer.

Preliminary studies have suggested that fat injections may even be clinically effective in patients who experience the adverse effects of radiation and in patients with severe burns.[28, 29, 30] The results are not only aesthetically pleasing but also appear to mimic the texture of skin better. Histologically, biopsy tissue shows neovascularization, increased collagen deposition, and dermal hyperplasia.[29] These effects are thought to be influenced by a population of stem cells, residing in the stromal vascular fraction of lipoaspirate tissue, that are capable of differentiating into multiple tissue types.[31, 32, 33]

Investigations regarding pharmacologic manipulation of the graft are underway. Some groups have tested agents such as insulin-like growth factor, basic fibroblast growth factor, and a selective B1 blocker to enhance the survival of lipograft in rats.

In addition, techniques for simplification of harvesting are being developed. The ability to grow cells in culture may allow for multiple grafting procedures with a single harvest. The results seem promising and may one day be used in human facial fat grafting.

Previous
 
Contributor Information and Disclosures
Author

Thomas J Gampper, MD, FACS Associate Professor of Plastic Surgery, Associate Clinical Professor of Neurosurgery, Director of Laser Surgery, Vice Chairman, Department of Plastic Surgery, University of Virginia School of Medicine; Director, Virginia Aesthetic Center

Thomas J Gampper, MD, FACS is a member of the following medical societies: American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association, American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, American Society of Plastic Surgeons, American Council of Academic Plastic Surgeons, American College of Surgeons, American Society for Laser Medicine and Surgery, Undersea and Hyperbaric Medical Society

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Coauthor(s)

Deborah Yu, MD Resident Physician, Department of Plastic and Maxillofacial Surgery, University of Virginia School of Medicine

Deborah Yu, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American Society of Maxillofacial Surgeons, American Society of Plastic Surgeons

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Specialty Editor Board

Francisco Talavera, PharmD, PhD Adjunct Assistant Professor, University of Nebraska Medical Center College of Pharmacy; Editor-in-Chief, Medscape Drug Reference

Disclosure: Received salary from Medscape for employment. for: Medscape.

Edward Owen Terino, MD Director, Department of Plastic Surgery, Los Robles Medical Center

Edward Owen Terino, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American College of Surgeons, American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, International College of Surgeons

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Chief Editor

Mark S Granick, MD, FACS Professor of Surgery, Chief, Division of Plastic Surgery, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School

Mark S Granick, MD, FACS is a member of the following medical societies: American College of Surgeons, American Society of Plastic Surgeons, Phi Beta Kappa, Northeastern Society of Plastic Surgeons, New Jersey Society of Plastic Surgeons

Disclosure: Serve(d) as a director, officer, partner, employee, advisor, consultant or trustee for: Waterjel, Inc.; Reconstat, LLC; DSM<br/>Serve(d) as a speaker or a member of a speakers bureau for: Novadaq<br/>Received none from Waterjel Inc. for board membership; Received none from Reconstat LLC for board membership; Received none from Open Science Co., LLC for board membership.

Additional Contributors

Gregory Gary Caputy, MD, PhD, FICS Chief Surgeon, Aesthetica

Gregory Gary Caputy, MD, PhD, FICS is a member of the following medical societies: Wound Healing Society, American Society for Laser Medicine and Surgery, International College of Surgeons, International College of Surgeons US Section, Pan-Pacific Surgical Association

Disclosure: Receive salary from Advantage Wound Care for employment. for: On the speaker's bureau for Smith and Nephew for Santyl Ointment.

Acknowledgements

Wendy Gottlieb, MD Private Practice

Wendy Gottlieb, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American Society of Plastic Surgeons

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Ashok Tholpady, MD, MSc Clinical Fellow, Department of Transfusion Medicine, NIH Clinical Center

Ashok Tholpady, MD, MSc is a member of the following medical societies: Academy of Clinical Laboratory Physicians and Scientists, American Society for Clinical Pathology, Association of Clinical Scientists, and College of American Pathologists

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

References
  1. Illouz YG. L'avenir de la reutilization de la graisse apres liposuccion. Rev Chir Esthet Lang Franc. 1984. 9:36.

  2. Ellenbogen R. Free autogenous pearl fat grafts in the face--a preliminary report of a rediscovered technique. Ann Plast Surg. 1986 Mar. 16(3):179-94. [Medline].

  3. Warren RJ, Aston SJ, Mendelson BC. Face lift. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011 Dec. 128(6):747e-64e. [Medline].

  4. Laglenne S, Lalanne B, Laglenne B, Asius J. Un nouveau produit comblement des rides, entirement resorbable. Dermatologie. 2000. 54:30-3.

  5. Richter AW, Ryde EM, Zetterström EO. Non-immunogenicity of a purified sodium hyaluronate preparation in man. Int Arch Allergy Appl Immunol. 1979. 59(1):45-8. [Medline].

  6. Olenius M. The first clinical study using a new biodegradable implant for the treatment of lips, wrinkles, and folds. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 1998 Mar-Apr. 22(2):97-101. [Medline].

  7. Narins RS, Brandt F, Leyden J, et al. A randomized, double-blind, multicenter comparison of the efficacy and tolerability of Restylane versus Zyplast for the correction of nasolabial folds. Dermatol Surg. 2003 Jun. 29(6):588-95. [Medline].

  8. The American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery Cosmetic Surgery National Data Bank Statistics. 2012;

  9. Winters R, Moulthrop T. Is autologous fat grafting superior to other fillers for facial rejuvenation?. Laryngoscope. 2013 May. 123(5):1068-9. [Medline].

  10. Clauser LC, Tieghi R, Galiè M, Carinci F. Structural fat grafting: facial volumetric restoration in complex reconstructive surgery. J Craniofac Surg. 2011 Sep. 22(5):1695-701. [Medline].

  11. Lam SM. Fat grafting: an alternative or adjunct to facelift surgery?. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am. 2013 May. 21(2):253-64. [Medline].

  12. Niechajev I, Sevcuk O. Long-term results of fat transplantation: clinical and histologic studies. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1994 Sep. 94(3):496-506. [Medline].

  13. Chajchir A, Benzaquen I, Moretti E. Comparative experimental study of autologous adipose tissue processed by different techniques. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 1993 Spring. 17(2):113-5. [Medline].

  14. Botti G, Pascali M, Botti C, Bodog F, Cervelli V. A clinical trial in facial fat grafting: filtered and washed versus centrifuged fat. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011 Jun. 127(6):2464-73. [Medline].

  15. Gerth DJ, King B, Rabach L, et al. Long-term volumetric retention of autologous fat grafting processed with closed-membrane filtration. Aesthet Surg J. 2014 Sep. 34(7):985-94. [Medline].

  16. Kuran I, Tumerdem B. A new simple method used to prepare fat for injection. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2005 Jan-Feb. 29(1):18-22; discussion 23. [Medline].

  17. Gatti JE. Permanent lip augmentation with serial fat grafting. Ann Plast Surg. 1999 Apr. 42(4):376-80. [Medline].

  18. Lin TM, Lin TY, Chou CK, et al. Application of microautologous fat transplantation in the correction of sunken upper eyelid. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2014 Nov. 2(11):e259. [Medline]. [Full Text].

  19. Covarrubias P, Cárdenas-Camarena L, Guerrerosantos J, Valenzuela L, Espejo I, Robles JA, et al. Evaluation of the histologic changes in the fat-grafted facial skin: clinical trial. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2013 Aug. 37(4):778-83. [Medline].

  20. Peer LA. Transplantation of Tissue. Baltimore: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 1959.

  21. Moore JH Jr, Kolaczynski JW, Morales LM, et al. Viability of fat obtained by syringe suction lipectomy: effects of local anesthesia with lidocaine. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 1995 Jul-Aug. 19(4):335-9. [Medline].

  22. Smahel J. Adipose tissue in plastic surgery. Ann Plast Surg. 1986 May. 16(5):444-53. [Medline].

  23. Ersek RA. Transplantation of purified autologous fat: a 3-year follow-up is disappointing. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1991 Feb. 87(2):219-27; discussion 228. [Medline].

  24. Cortese A, Savastano G, Felicetta L. Free fat transplantation for facial tissue augmentation. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2000 Feb. 58(2):164-9; discussion 169-70. [Medline].

  25. Bertossi D, Zancanaro C, Trevisiol L, et al. Lipofilling of the lips: ultrastructural evaluation by transmission electron microscopy of injected adipose tissue. Arch Facial Plast Surg. 2003 Sep-Oct. 5(5):392-8. [Medline].

  26. Coleman SR. Long-term survival of fat transplants: controlled demonstrations. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 1995 Sep-Oct. 19(5):421-5. [Medline].

  27. Koh KS, Oh TS, Kim H, et al. Clinical application of human adipose tissue-derived mesenchymal stem cells in progressive hemifacial atrophy (Parry-Romberg disease) with microfat grafting techniques using 3-dimensional computed tomography and 3-dimensional camera. Ann Plast Surg. 2012 Sep. 69(3):331-7. [Medline].

  28. Rigotti G, Marchi A, Galie M, et al. Clinical treatment of radiotherapy tissue damage by lipoaspirate transplant: a healing process mediated by adipose-derived adult stem cells. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2007 Apr 15. 119(5):1409-22; discussion 1423-4. [Medline].

  29. Klinger M, Marazzi M, Vigo D, et al. Fat injection for cases of severe burn outcomes: a new perspective of scar remodeling and reduction. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2008 May. 32(3):465-9. [Medline].

  30. Viard R, Bouguila J, Voulliaume D, Comparin JP, Dionyssopoulos A, Foyatier JL. [Fat grafting in facial burns sequelae.]. Ann Chir Plast Esthet. 2011 Jul 30. [Medline].

  31. Tholpady SS, Llull R, Ogle RC, et al. Adipose tissue: stem cells and beyond. Clin Plast Surg. 2006 Jan. 33(1):55-62, vi. [Medline].

  32. Zuk PA, Zhu M, Ashjian P, et al. Human adipose tissue is a source of multipotent stem cells. Mol Biol Cell. 2002 Dec. 13(12):4279-95. [Medline].

  33. Brzoska M, Geiger H, Gauer S, et al. Epithelial differentiation of human adipose tissue-derived adult stem cells. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2005 Apr 29. 330(1):142-50. [Medline].

  34. Ayhan M, Senen D, Adanali G, et al. Use of beta blockers for increasing survival of free fat grafts. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2001 Sep-Oct. 25(5):338-42. [Medline].

  35. Billings E Jr, May JW Jr. Historical review and present status of free fat graft autotransplantation in plastic and reconstructive surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1989 Feb. 83(2):368-81. [Medline].

  36. Bosniak S, Cantisano-Zilkha M, Glavas IP. Nonanimal stabilized hyaluronic acid for lip augmentation and facial rhytid ablation. Arch Facial Plast Surg. 2004 Nov-Dec. 6(6):379-83. [Medline].

  37. Bostwick John III. Augmentation Mammaplasty. Plastic and Reconstructive Breast Surgery. 2000. I:239-370 (343).

  38. Carpaneda CA, Ribeiro MT. Percentage of graft viability versus injected volume in adipose autotransplants. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 1994 Winter. 18(1):17-9. [Medline].

  39. Chajchir A, Benzaquen I. Fat-grafting injection for soft-tissue augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1989 Dec. 84(6):921-34; discussion 935. [Medline].

  40. Coleman SR. Facial recontouring with lipostructure. Clin Plast Surg. 1997 Apr. 24(2):347-67. [Medline].

  41. Kulkarni RK, Moore EG, Hegyeli AF, et al. Biodegradable poly(lactic acid) polymers. J Biomed Mater Res. 1971 May. 5(3):169-81. [Medline].

  42. Kulkarni RK, Pani KC, Neuman C, et al. Polylactic acid for surgical implants. Arch Surg. 1966 Nov. 93(5):839-43. [Medline].

  43. Montanana Vizcaino J, Baena Montilla P, et al. Complications of autografting fat obtained by liposuction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1990 Apr. 85(4):638-9. [Medline].

  44. Niechajev I. Lip enhancement: surgical alternatives and histologic aspects. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2000 Mar. 105(3):1173-83; discussion 1184-7. [Medline].

  45. Rees TD, Aston SJ, Thorne CHM. Blepharoplasty and facialplasty (subheadings facial aging and morphologic changes). Plast Surg. 1990. 3:2360-3.

  46. Saylan Z. Facial fillers and their complications. Aesthetic Surg J. 2003. 23:221-4.

  47. Schuller-Petrovic S. Improving the aesthetic aspect of soft tissue defects on the face using autologous fat transplantation. Facial Plast Surg. 1997 Apr. 13(2):119-24. [Medline].

  48. Sommer B, Sattler G. Current concepts of fat graft survival: histology of aspirated adipose tissue and review of the literature. Dermatol Surg. 2000 Dec. 26(12):1159-66. [Medline].

  49. Vleggaar D. Facial volumetric correction with injectable poly-L-lactic acid. Dermatol Surg. 2005 Nov. 31(11 Pt 2):1511-7; discussion 1517-8. [Medline].

  50. Yuksel E, Weinfeld AB, Cleek R, et al. Increased free fat-graft survival with the long-term, local delivery of insulin, insulin-like growth factor-I, and basic fibroblast growth factor by PLGA/PEG microspheres. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2000 Apr. 105(5):1712-20. [Medline].

 
Previous
Next
 
Preoperative view demonstrates marionette lines.
Infiltration of the abdominal fat donor site with tumescent fluid.
Aspiration of fat.
Layering of fat and tumescent fluid in the syringe.
Fat in a tulip syringe.
Transfer of aspirated fat into a small syringe for controlled injection.
Injection of a marionette line.
Injection of the glabellar furrow.
 
 
 
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2016 by WebMD LLC. This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.