Citations

Background Radiation-induced skin injuries have been treated with different medical therapies and have shown diverse outcomes. We aim to evaluate the effect of adipose-derived stem cells (ADSCs) therapy on radiation-induced skin injury. Methods We performed a review by querying PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, and EMBASE databases from inception to April 2020 following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The MeSH terms “adipose-derived stem cells,” “wound healing,” “radiation,” and synonyms in combinations determined our search strategy. Experimental peer-reviewed articles describing the protocol and comparing the results with controls were included. Non-English studies were excluded. Results Our search recorded a total of 137 articles. Only 8 studies met our inclusion criteria and were included in this review. Five studies evaluated the use of ADSC alone, whereas the others evaluated the efficacy of ADSC seeded in scaffolds. Adipose-derived stem cell–based therapies, either alone or seeded in scaffolds, were shown to improve wound healing in most studies when compared with controls. Conclusions There is evidence supporting the positive benefits from ADSC-based therapies in radiation-induced skin injury. However, further studies are needed to standardize the method of ADSC extraction, radiation-induced skin injury experimental model, and increase the time of follow-up to evaluate the results accurately.

Background: Archeological archives report cranioplasty as 1 of the oldest surgical procedures; however, it was not until the last century that true advances have been made. Alternative approaches are necessary to achieve optimal closure of the defect with fewer adverse effects. We aim to evaluate the use of human adipose-derived stem cells (hADSCs) alone or seeded in scaffolds as the main treatment for cranial bone defects and to assess human patient outcomes. Methods: A systematic review was performed by querying PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature databases with the MeSH terms: “adipose-derived stem cells,” “cranial bone defect,” “stromal vascular factor,” “fat grafting,” as well as synonyms in combinations determined by our search strategy. We included human models that used hADSCs as primary therapy. We excluded studies in languages other than English. Results: One hundred ninety-four studies were identified after removal of duplicates. Four articles that used hADSCs as the main therapy to treat calvarial defects in humans were included. One article applied the cell therapy alone, and 3 used β-tricalcium phosphate granules as a scaffold to seed the hADSCs. Conclusions: Bone regeneration was reached in a short and intermediate period using autologous hADSCs in humans with no major adverse effects in all 4 articles included. A long-term follow-up study (6 years) exhibited late infections and reabsorption of the β-tricalcium phosphate scaffold seeded with hADSCs.

The potential to differentiate into different cell lines, added to the easy and cost-effective method of extraction, makes adipose-derived stem cells (ADSCs) an object of interest in lymphedema treatment. Our study’s goal was to conduct a comprehensive systematic review of the use of ADSCs in lymphatic tissue engineering and regeneration. On July 23, 2019, using PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Clinical Answers, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Embase databases, we conducted a systematic review of published literature on the use of ADSCs in lymphatic tissue engineering and regeneration. There were no language or time frame limitations, and the following search strategy was applied: ((Adipose stem cell) OR Adipose-derived stem cell)) AND ((Lymphedema) OR Breast Cancer Lymphedema). Only original research manuscripts were included. Fourteen studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Eleven studies were experimental (in vitro or in vivo in animals), and only three were clinical. Publications on the topic demonstrated that ADSCs promote lymphangiogenesis, and its effect could be enhanced by modulation of vascular endothelial growth factor-C, interleukin-7, prospero homeobox protein 1, and transforming growth factor-β1. Pilot clinical studies included 11 patients with breast cancer-related lymphedema, and no significant side effects were present at 12-month follow-up. Literature on the use of ADSCs in lymphatic tissue engineering and regeneration demonstrated promising data. Clinical evidence is still in its infancy, but the scientific community agrees that ADSCs can be useful in regenerative lymphangiogenesis. Data collected in this review indicate that unprecedented advances in lymphedema treatment can be anticipated in the upcoming years.

Background: Lymphovenous anastomosis (LVA) is an accepted microsurgical treatment for lymphedema of the upper extremity (UE). This study summarizes and analyzes recent data on the outcomes associated with LVA for UE lymphedema at varying degrees of severity. Methods: A literature search was conducted in the PubMed database to extract articles published through June 19, 2020. Studies reporting data on postoperative improvement in limb circumference/volume or subjective improvement in quality of life for patients with primary or secondary lymphedema of the UE were included. Extracted data consisted of demographic data, number of patients and upper limbs, duration of symptoms before LVA, surgical technique, follow-up, and objective and subjective outcomes. Results: A total of 92 articles were identified, of which 16 studies were eligible for final inclusion comprising a total of 349 patients and 244 upper limbs. The average age of patients ranged from 38.4 to 64 years. The duration of lymphedema before LVA ranged from 9 months to 7 years. The mean length of follow-up ranged from 6 months to 8 years. Fourteen studies reported an objective improvement in limb circumference or volume measurements following LVA, ranging from 0% to 100%. Patients included had varying severity of lymphedema, ranging from Campisi stage I to IV. The maximal improvement in objective measurements was found in patients with lower stage lymphedema. Conclusion: LVA is a safe, effective technique for the treatment of UE lymphedema refractory to decompressive treatment. Results of LVA indicate greater efficacy in earlier stages of lymphedema before advanced lymphatic sclerosis.

AbstractWearable electronic devices are a convenient solution to pain intensity assessment as they can provide continuous monitoring for more precise medication adjustments. However, there is little evidence regarding the use of wearable electronic devices for chronic pain intensity assessment. Our primary objective was to examine the physiologic parameters used by wearable electronic devices for chronic pain intensity assessment. We initially inquired PubMed, CINAHL, and Embase for studies evaluating the use of wearable electronic devices for chronic pain intensity assessment. We updated our inquiry by searching on PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Google Scholar. English peer‐reviewed studies were included, with no exclusions based on time frame or publication status. Of 348 articles that were identified on the first inquiry, 8 fulfilled the eligibility criteria. Of 179 articles that were identified on the last inquiry, only 1 fulfilled the eligibility criteria. We found articles evaluating wristbands, smartwatches, and belts. Parameters evaluated were psychomotor and sleep patterns, space and time mobility, heart rate variability, and skeletal muscle electrical activity. Most of the studies found significant positive associations between physiological parameters measured by wearable electronic devices and self‐reporting pain scales. Wearable electronic devices reliably reflect physiologic or biometric parameters, providing a physiological correlation for pain. Early stage investigation suggests that the degree of pain intensity can be discerned, which ideally will reduce the bias inherent to existing numeric/verbal scales. Further research on the use of these devices is vital.

Background Wearable devices and sensor technology provide objective, unbiased range of motion measurements that help health care professionals overcome the hindrances of protractor-based goniometry. This review aims to analyze the accuracy of existing wearable sensor technologies for hand range of motion measurement and identify the most accurate one. Methods We performed a systematic review by searching PubMed, CINAHL, and Embase for studies evaluating wearable sensor technology in hand range of motion assessment. Keywords used for the inquiry were related to wearable devices and hand goniometry. Results Of the 71 studies, 11 met the inclusion criteria. Ten studies evaluated gloves and 1 evaluated a wristband. The most common types of sensors used were bend sensors, followed by inertial sensors, Hall effect sensors, and magnetometers. Most studies compared wearable devices with manual goniometry, achieving optimal accuracy. Although most of the devices reached adequate levels of measurement error, accuracy evaluation in the reviewed studies might be subject to bias owing to the use of poorly reliable measurement techniques for comparison of the devices. Conclusion Gloves using inertial sensors were the most accurate. Future studies should use different comparison techniques, such as infrared camera–based goniometry or virtual motion tracking, to evaluate the performance of wearable devices.