Comparison of Stored and Fresh Injectable Acellular Adipose Matrix in Soft Tissue Reconstruction in a Murine Model

Abstract Background We previously showed comparable volume effects of injections of acellular adipose matrix (AAM), an adipose tissue-derived extracellular matrix, and conventional fat grafting in a murine model. Thus, AAM could be a novel allogenic injectable product. However, its retention rate poses a concern, as repeated AAM injections may be required in some cases. This study investigated the biological properties and therapeutic value of stored AAM and compared them with those of fresh AAM, in a murine model. Methods AAM was manufactured from fresh human abdominoplasty fat. Fresh and stored injectable AAM was prepared within 24 h and 3 months after generation, respectively. Either fresh or stored injectable AAM was injected into the scalp of athymic nude mice (0.2 mL/sample, n = 6 per group). After 8 weeks, graft retention was assessed through weight measurement, and histological analysis was performed, including immunofluorescence staining for CD31 and perilipin. Results Retention rate was significantly reduced in the stored compared to the fresh injectable AAM group. Nevertheless, histological analysis revealed comparable inflammatory cell presence, with minimal capsule formation, in both groups. Adipogenesis occurred in both groups, with no significant difference in the blood vessel area (%) between groups. Conclusions Although the volume effects of stored AAM for soft tissue reconstruction were limited compared to those of fresh injectable AAM, stored AAM had similar capacity for adipogenesis and angiogenesis. This promising allogeneic injectable holds the potential to serve as an effective “off-the-shelf” alternative for repeated use within a 3-month storage period. 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 https://link.springer.com/journal/00266 .