The surge in the cosmetics industry has notable beginnings.
Across the U.S., women are choosing trendy injectable fillers derived from donated cadaver fat. This tissue is used to enhance and reshape their bodies.
However, a plastic surgeon in New York City is dismissing the excitement around this trend, firmly deciding not to use “off-the-shelf fat” in breast surgery, even though it’s being promoted as a breakthrough in regenerative medicine.
Dr. Tommaso Adona, who leads the New York Plastic Surgery Group, isn’t necessarily against using such fillers like AlloClae, but he won’t use them for breast augmentation.
“I’d feel more at ease using this in another context,” he told the Post. “Breasts are unique and deserve proper consideration.”
He expressed being “not satisfied” with the present research surrounding these products.
“I’m fine with using it on other body areas,” Adona mentioned, “but I believe breasts warrant more focus, research, and evaluation in the years ahead.”
One of his significant worries relates to the possibility that AlloClae might interfere with standard breast cancer screenings and imaging tests.
Since there’s a lack of extensive long-term data, concerns linger about whether these injected substances can lead to fat necrosis or the death of adipose tissues.
“When you take fat from a patient’s body, the risk of dead fat being present is minimal, but it’s never zero,” Adona noted, having handled over 10,000 breast surgeries. “I’m dubious about the viability of this fat once injected.”
If the filler fails to integrate into the breast, it could lead to oil cysts or calcifications. These may resemble hard lumps on mammograms, potentially triggering false alarms for cancer screenings.
“This could be problematic,” Adona said, “because radiologists might flag it as suspicious, leading to unnecessary monitoring, evaluations, or biopsies, ultimately increasing patient anxiety.”
On the other hand, while preclinical studies in mice have indicated that AlloClae shows solid graft retention and integration after six months without tissue necrosis, the results might not reliably translate to humans, particularly in the long term.
“Our understanding of the body’s behavior changes over time,” Adona explained. “What appears good now might not remain so years down the line.”
“We need to see outcomes tracked over periods of two, five, or even ten years to ensure there’s no ongoing issue of swelling or rejection, which could be mistaken for dead fat or necrosis,” he added.
Understanding Fat Grafting — The Role of Cadaver Fat
Two decades ago, implants were common in breast and butt augmentation, but recently, autologous fat grafting has gained substantial traction.
This approach involves taking fat from a patient’s own body, often from the abdomen or thighs, refining it, and then re-injecting it into the target area to enhance volume.
While it’s proven safe and effective, it comes with challenges. For example, recovery from breast fat grafting typically takes about six weeks, and many patients need to take a week or two off from work.
Moreover, not everyone has enough expendable fat; Adona estimates that around 5% of patients may be too slim or toned to be candidates for this method.
New products like AlloClae are being presented as an alternative. Advertised as “the first structural adipose tissue engineered for aesthetic body procedures,” its makers claim it offers cushioning, volume, and support.
This filler, which is sterilized and void of DNA from deceased donors, maintains the natural structure of fat and is designed to provide immediate volume upon application.
It can be administered via a minimally invasive in-office injection without general anesthesia, allowing many patients to resume light activities within a day.
As Adona said, “I can essentially be active later that same day.”
For those looking to enhance their buttocks or soften hip dips, these fillers present an “exciting” option for plastic surgeons, though uncertainties linger due to inadequate long-term breast data.
“We’re not seeing much research from the last year, definitely less than two years,” Adona commented.
Despite AlloClae being FDA-compliant, it’s classified as a human cell and tissue product, granting it a selling pathway that doesn’t require full regulatory approval, unlike more established injectables like Botox.
AlloClae became widely available in the U.S. last year, gradually circulating starting in the fall of 2024, with select practitioners beginning trials on it. However, most studies have been limited to preclinical phases, often involving animals. While initial results look promising, there’s a stark lack of human data, according to Adona.
A recent study reported a lack of substantial research, revealing that only ten human studies investigated structural fat fillers, involving a mere 93 patients, most with short follow-up periods.
Until more long-term studies are available, Adona plans to turn away patients eager for AlloClae treatments, although he seems to be in the minority.
On social media, numerous plastic surgeons are promoting this treatment as a fast solution for breast enhancement, with many comments expressing eagerness for this readily available fat.
Many individuals point to dissatisfaction with implants and prior complications, seeking alternatives to foreign materials.
Fortunately, Adona believes that most of these individuals could achieve their aesthetic goals through traditional liposuction and fat grafting, which is supported by years of clinical evidence.
“There’s definitely a demographic of patients who are low on fat,” he acknowledged. “But in many cases, there’s likely a source from which we can draw fat.”
Tiger Aesthetics has not yet replied to inquiries regarding the product.
