Autologous Nanofat Injection for Cutaneous Scars: A PRISMA 2020 Systematic Review of Clinical Outcomes and Certainty of Evidence
- 1Department of Plastic Surgery, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Kaohsiung, 83301, Taiwan
Abstract
Background: Cutaneous scarring after surgery, trauma, and burns carries aesthetic, functional, and psychological morbidity. Nanofat, mechanically emulsified lipoaspirate rich in the stromal vascular fraction, has been proposed to improve scar quality, but its clinical benefit, durability, and specificity relative to conventional fat grafting remain uncertain.
Objective: To appraise the clinical outcomes of autologous nanofat injection for cutaneous scars and grade the certainty of the evidence.
Methods: Following PRISMA 2020 (PROSPERO CRD420261424355), MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Scopus were searched to 15 April 2026 for clinical studies published from 2021 onward. Two reviewers independently screened records, extracted data in duplicate, and appraised risk of bias with RoB 2 and the NIH tool for before–after studies. Certainty was rated with GRADE. Findings were synthesized narratively and tabulated by effect direction, scar category, and treatment timing.
Results: Five studies (two randomized, three uncontrolled; 108 patients) were included. In both randomized trials, which applied nanofat at wound closure, scar scores favored nanofat at 3 to 6 months. At 12 months, observer-rated scores remained better in the split-scar trial (n = 12), whereas patient-rated scores and erythema no longer differed. In the three-arm trial, nanofat-enriched fat did not differ from conventional fat grafting in most outcomes. In one uncontrolled series, mean Vancouver Scar Scale score fell by about 45% (10.0 to 5.5) at 3 months, with reduced pain and pruritus. No serious adverse event was reported, but reporting was incomplete. Certainty was low for short-term scar appearance and serious adverse events and very low for longer-term appearance, symptom relief, and nanofat-specific benefit.
Conclusion: Current evidence suggests a possible short-term effect of nanofat on scar remodeling, particularly when applied at surgical wound closure. A durable, nanofat-attributable benefit remains uncertain, and the available data are too limited to exclude uncommon harm. Adequately powered randomized trials with standardized preparation, validated and objective outcomes, and follow-up of at least 12 months are needed.
Registration: PROSPERO registration number CRD420261424355.
Related
- Preoperative Skin Preconditioning with Autologous PRP and SVF: Effects on Cutaneous and Adnexal Repair in a Rabbit Pilot Study
- Computed tomography-guided percutaneous puncture injection of methylene blue mixed with autologous blood for preoperative localization of pulmonary nodules: analysis of 407 cases
- Evidence Mapping, Certainty Appraisal, and Acupoint Prescription Pattern Mining of Acupuncture for Poststroke Dysphagia: An Overview of Systematic Reviews.
- The Effectiveness of Autologous Platelet-Rich Plasma Topical Application Versus Injection in the Healing of Chronic Venous Ulcers.
- Autologous Collagen-Induced Chondrogenesis (ACIC) for Osteochondral Lesions of the Talus: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
BibTeX
@article{kuo2026autologous,
title = {{Autologous Nanofat Injection for Cutaneous Scars: A PRISMA 2020 Systematic Review of Clinical Outcomes and Certainty of Evidence}},
author = {Pao-Jen Kuo and Pi-Chieh Lin and Ching-Hua Hsieh},
journal = {Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.2147/tcrm.s646178},
url = {https://doi.org/10.2147/tcrm.s646178},
note = {CC BY-NC 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Autologous Nanofat Injection for Cutaneous Scars: A PRISMA 2020 Systematic Review of Clinical Outcomes and Certainty of Evidence
AU - Pao-Jen Kuo
AU - Pi-Chieh Lin
AU - Ching-Hua Hsieh
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/26
JO - Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
DO - 10.2147/tcrm.s646178
UR - https://doi.org/10.2147/tcrm.s646178
AB - Background: Cutaneous scarring after surgery, trauma, and burns carries aesthetic, functional, and psychological morbidity. Nanofat, mechanically emulsified lipoaspirate rich in the stromal vascular fraction, has been proposed to improve scar quality, but its clinical benefit, durability, and specificity relative to conventional fat grafting remain uncertain. Objective: To appraise the clinical outcomes of autologous nanofat injection for cutaneous scars and grade the certainty of the evidence. Methods: Following PRISMA 2020 (PROSPERO CRD420261424355), MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Scopus were searched to 15 April 2026 for clinical studies published from 2021 onward. Two reviewers independently screened records, extracted data in duplicate, and appraised risk of bias with RoB 2 and the NIH tool for before–after studies. Certainty was rated with GRADE. Findings were synthesized narratively and tabulated by effect direction, scar category, and treatment timing. Results: Five studies (two randomized, three uncontrolled; 108 patients) were included. In both randomized trials, which applied nanofat at wound closure, scar scores favored nanofat at 3 to 6 months. At 12 months, observer-rated scores remained better in the split-scar trial (n = 12), whereas patient-rated scores and erythema no longer differed. In the three-arm trial, nanofat-enriched fat did not differ from conventional fat grafting in most outcomes. In one uncontrolled series, mean Vancouver Scar Scale score fell by about 45% (10.0 to 5.5) at 3 months, with reduced pain and pruritus. No serious adverse event was reported, but reporting was incomplete. Certainty was low for short-term scar appearance and serious adverse events and very low for longer-term appearance, symptom relief, and nanofat-specific benefit. Conclusion: Current evidence suggests a possible short-term effect of nanofat on scar remodeling, particularly when applied at surgical wound closure. A durable, nanofat-attributable benefit remains uncertain, and the available data are too limited to exclude uncommon harm. Adequately powered randomized trials with standardized preparation, validated and objective outcomes, and follow-up of at least 12 months are needed. Registration: PROSPERO registration number CRD420261424355.
SN - 1176-6336
SN - 1178-203X
ER -