Comparison of the Difference in the Stemness Changes of Adipose-Derived Stem Cell and Dedifferentiated Fat Cell After Fat Transplantation: In Vivo and In Vitro Evidence.

BACKGROUND

Promoting the fat retention rate effectively remains a current challenge in the fat transplantation technique. Both adipose-derived stem cells (ADSCs) and dedifferentiated fat cells (DFATs) have strong multilineage differentiation potential and can promote fat graft retention rate. This study aimed to compare the difference in the stemness changes of ADSCs and DFATs after fat transplantation from both in vitro and in vivo perspectives.

METHODS

ADSCs and DFATs were obtained using type I collagenase digestion and identified in morphology, cell-surface antigens, and multilineage differentiation potentials. Next, a method we called oxygen-glucose deprivation (OGD) was used to simulate an ischemic and hypoxia environment in vitro, and then the effect of OGD on the survival, proliferation, and differentiation capacities of ADSCs and DFATs was observed. Moreover, a mixture of fat with ADSCs or DFATs was injected into the subcutaneous of nude mice, followed by evaluation in the changes of fat retention rate and histology via weight measurement, HE/Masson staining, and immunofluorescent/immunohistochemistry staining of perilipin-1 or CD31, respectively.

RESULTS

ADSCs showed stronger survival, proliferation, and differentiation capacities than DFATs after exposure to the same degree of OGD injury. In addition, ADSC cell-assisted fat grafts showed a higher retention rate and maintained better fat integrity with fewer vacuoles, fibrosis, and lower inflammation extent compared with DFAT cell-assisted fat grafts; meanwhile, ADSC cell-assisted fat transplantation is more beneficial for adipogenesis and angiogenesis than DFAT.

CONCLUSION

Our findings indicate that ADSC might be a more ideal stemness cell than DFAT in promoting fat retention rate.

NO LEVEL ASSIGNED

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each submission to which Evidence-Based Medicine rankings are applicable. This excludes Review Articles, Book Reviews, and manuscripts that concern Basic Science, Animal Studies, Cadaver Studies, and Experimental Studies. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .