Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2017 Dec;19(12):1491-1500.
doi: 10.1016/j.jcyt.2017.07.013. Epub 2017 Sep 13.

Ultrasound-assisted liposuction provides a source for functional adipose-derived stromal cells

Dominik Duscher  1 , Zeshaan N Maan  2 , Anna Luan  2 , Matthias M Aitzetmüller  3 , Elizabeth A Brett  2 , David Atashroo  2 , Alexander J Whittam  2 , Michael S Hu  2 , Graham G Walmsley  4 , Khosrow S Houschyar  5 , Arndt F Schilling  6 , Hans-Guenther Machens  3 , Geoffrey C Gurtner  2 , Michael T Longaker  4 , Derrick C Wan  2
Affiliations

Ultrasound-assisted liposuction provides a source for functional adipose-derived stromal cells

Dominik Duscher et al. Cytotherapy. 2017 Dec.

Abstract

Background aims: Regenerative medicine employs human mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) for their multi-lineage plasticity and their pro-regenerative cytokine secretome. Adipose-derived mesenchymal stromal cells (ASCs) are concentrated in fat tissue, and the ease of harvest via liposuction makes them a particularly interesting cell source. However, there are various liposuction methods, and few have been assessed regarding their impact on ASC functionality. Here we study the impact of the two most popular ultrasound-assisted liposuction (UAL) devices currently in clinical use, VASER (Solta Medical) and Lysonix 3000 (Mentor) on ASCs.

Methods: After lipoaspirate harvest and processing, we sorted for ASCs using fluorescent-assisted cell sorting based on an established surface marker profile (CD34+CD31-CD45-). ASC yield, viability, osteogenic and adipogenic differentiation capacity and in vivo regenerative performance were assessed.

Results: Both UAL samples demonstrated equivalent ASC yield and viability. VASER UAL ASCs showed higher osteogenic and adipogenic marker expression, but a comparable differentiation capacity was observed. Soft tissue healing and neovascularization were significantly enhanced via both UAL-derived ASCs in vivo, and there was no significant difference between the cell therapy groups.

Conclusions: Taken together, our data suggest that UAL allows safe and efficient harvesting of the mesenchymal stromal cellular fraction of adipose tissue and that cells harvested via this approach are suitable for cell therapy and tissue engineering applications.

Keywords: ASCs; Lysonix; VASER; adipose-derived stromal cells; adult mesenchymal stromal cells; cell therapy; regenerative medicine; ultrasound-assisted liposuction.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

DISCLOSURE OF POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST

DD and GCG are listed on the patent “Efficient Stem Cell Delivery Into Biomaterials Using a Novel Capillary Driven Encapsulation Technique” and GCG is listed on the patent “Intelligent Biodegradable Pullulan Regenerative Matrix for Tissue Engineering” assigned to Stanford University. ZNM, AL, MMA, EAB, DA, AJW, MSH, GGW, KSH, AFS, HGM, MTL and DCW have no potential conflicts of interest, affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed herein.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Vaser and Lysonix lipoaspirates yield similar amounts of ASCs with comparable viability. (A): FACS analysis for identification of ASCs (defined as CD45−/CD31−/CD34+) of Vaser and Lysonix derived lipoaspirates; (B): CD45−/CD31−/CD34+ASC-quantification in Vaser and Lysonix derived SVF showed no significant difference in ASC yield across samples (C): MTT assay showed no significant difference in cell viability. n=3; data are given as mean ±SEM. Abbreviations: SVF: Stromal Vascular Fraction; ASC: Adipose derived Stromal Cells.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Assessment of Osteogenic Differentiation Capacity of Vaser and Lysonix-derived samples. (A) and (B): Alizarin red staining and quantification showing a trend towards higher mineralization for Vaser samples; (C), (D), and (E): Real-time-PCR quantifying the expression of early (RUNX-2), intermediate (OPN) and late (OCN) osteogenic marker. RUNX-2 showed significantly higher expression in Vaser samples on day 7 and 14 and OCN was significantly higher expressed in Vaser samples on day 14, while OPN was significantly higher on day 0 in samples of Lysonix ASCs. Abbreviations: PCR: polymerase chain reaction, RUNX2: runt related transcription factor 2, OPN: osteopontin, OCN: osteocalcin.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Adipogenic Differentiation Capacity of Vaser and Lysonix derived samples. (A), (B) and (C): Real-time-PCR for quantification of key-adipogenic markers (PPAR-γ, FABP-4 and LPL) showed a higher expression of all markers in Vaser harvested samples at day 7. (D) and (E): Oil Red O staining showed no differences in lipid accumulation. Abbreviations: PPAR-γ: peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-γ, FABP4: fatty acid binding protein 4, and LPL: lipoprotein lipase.
Figure 4
Figure 4
ASCs harvested with either VASER or Lysonix liposuction showed similar ability to enhance murine wound healing. There was a significant enhancement of wound closure compared with control in both cell therapy groups. (A) wound appearance, (B) kinetics of wound size and (C) closure time of CTRL, Vaser and Lysonix groups. n= 8; p< 0.01. All data are given as mean ±SEM. Abbreviations: CTRL: control.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Hydrogels seeded with Vaser and Lysonix derived ASCs resulted in improvement of vascular density of wounds. (A) CD 31 (red) and DAPI (blue) staining were performed and showed increased neovascularization in both ASC seeded hydrogel groups. (B) Quantification showed no significant difference between ASC loaded hydrogels. Scale bar= 100 μm. n=8. Asterisk indicates p≤0,05. All data are mean ± SEM, Abbreviations: CTRL: control; HPF: high power field.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Sterodimas A, et al. Thirtyfour years of liposuction: past, present and future. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2012;16(3):393–406. - PubMed
    1. Fischer G. Liposculpture: the “correct” history of liposuction. Part I. Dermatologic Surgery. 1990;16(12):1087–1089. - PubMed
    1. Chung MT, et al. Isolation of Human Adipose – Derived Stromal Cells Using Laser – Assisted Liposuction and Their Therapeutic Potential in Regenerative Medicine. Stem cells translational medicine. 2013;2(10):808–817. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Berry MG, Davies D. Liposuction: a review of principles and techniques. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2011;64(8):985–92. - PubMed
    1. Zocchi M. Ultrasonic liposculpturing. Aesthetic plastic surgery. 1992;16(4):287–298. - PubMed

MeSH terms