Department of Pathology & Medical Biology, University of Groningen and University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.
Department of Plastic Surgery, University of Groningen and University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.
J Tissue Eng Regen Med. 2018 Jan;12(1):e261-e274. doi: 10.1002/term.2407. Epub 2017 Jun 15.
Intraoperative application of the stromal vascular fraction (SVF) of adipose tissue requires a fast and efficient isolation procedure of adipose tissue. This review was performed to systematically assess and compare procedures currently used for the intraoperative isolation of cellular SVF (cSVF) and tissue SVF (tSVF) that still contain the extracellular matrix. Pubmed, EMBASE and the Cochrane central register of controlled trials databases were searched for studies that compare procedures for intraoperative isolation of SVF (searched 28 September 2016). Outcomes of interest were cell yield, viability of cells, composition of SVF, duration, cost and procedure characteristics. Procedures were subdivided into procedures resulting in a cSVF or tSVF. Thirteen out of 3038 studies, evaluating 18 intraoperative isolation procedures, were considered eligible. In general, cSVF and tSVF intraoperative isolation procedures had similar cell yield, cell viability and SVF composition compared to a nonintraoperative (i.e. culture laboratory-based collagenase protocol) control group within the same studies. The majority of intraoperative isolation procedures are less time consuming than nonintraoperative control groups, however. Intraoperative isolation procedures are less time-consuming than nonintraoperative control groups with similar cell yield, viability of cells and composition of SVF, and therefore more suitable for use in the clinic. Nevertheless, none of the intraoperative isolation procedures could be designated as the preferred procedure to isolate SVF. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
脂肪组织基质血管成分（SVF）的术中应用需要一种快速而有效的脂肪组织分离程序。本综述旨在系统评估和比较目前用于术中分离仍含有细胞外基质的细胞 SVF（cSVF）和组织 SVF（tSVF）的程序。在 Pubmed、EMBASE 和 Cochrane 对照试验中心注册数据库中搜索比较 SVF 术中分离程序的研究（搜索日期为 2016 年 9 月 28 日）。感兴趣的结果是细胞产量、细胞活力、SVF 组成、持续时间、成本和程序特征。程序分为导致 cSVF 或 tSVF 的程序。在考虑的 18 项术中分离程序中，有 13 项来自于 3038 项研究。一般来说，与同一研究中的非术中（即基于培养实验室的胶原酶方案）对照组相比，cSVF 和 tSVF 术中分离程序的细胞产量、细胞活力和 SVF 组成相似。然而，大多数术中分离程序比非术中对照组耗时更短。术中分离程序比非术中对照组耗时更短，细胞产量、细胞活力和 SVF 组成相似，因此更适合在临床上使用。然而，没有一种术中分离程序可以被指定为分离 SVF 的首选程序。版权所有©2017 年 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
