Mechanical isolation of stromal vascular fraction using a spiral-based device: cellular outcomes and point-of-care workflow considerations

Background Stromal vascular fraction (SVF) from adipose tissue represents a promising source of regenerative cells for a wide range of clinical applications. A major trend in SVF isolation is the increasing use of dedicated devices and systems to enhance standardization and reproducibility. At the same time, real-world implementation of new technologies requires consideration of workflow-related factors alongside biological results. This study aimed to characterize the novel BMC Uniq® SVF device, describe a mechanical isolation approach (MI-SVF) with this device, and evaluate the cellular outcomes of MI-SVF in comparison with enzymatic processing (EI-SVF). Results The BMC Uniq® SVF device is a spiral-based, closed system composed of two housings and three filters, designed as a sterile disposable unit. Lipoaspirate samples from 10 healthy female donors were equally divided and handled using MI-SVF (decantation, device processing, centrifugation) or EI-SVF (adding collagenase and post-digestion steps to the MI-SVF protocol). Total cell yield was significantly greater in the EI-SVF group (mean ± standard error (SE) 94.9×10⁴ ± 6.4×10⁴ versus 37.5×10⁴ ± 2.7×10⁴ for MI-SVF; p = 0.002). The flow cytometry demonstrated significantly higher proportions of CD90+ (10.3 ± 1.3% versus 5.4 ± 0.9%; p = 0.014) and CD73 + cells (10.7 ± 0.7% versus 6.6 ± 0.7%; p = 0.010) in MI-SVF compared with EI-SVF, with no significant differences in CD105 + percentage. There were no differences in cell viability (MI-SVF: mean 87.0%; EI-SVF: 83.9%). MI-SVF samples showed a CFU-F frequency of 5.0 ± 0.3% and consistently demonstrated adipogenic, chondrogenic, and osteogenic differentiation potential. Conclusions The BMC Uniq® SVF device is a simple closed single-use system for mechanical SVF extraction in point-of-care applications. Fresh MI-SVF samples derived in such a way had one of the highest reported cell yields and demonstrated viability, immunophenotype, clonogenic capacity, and multilineage differentiation potential that were comparable to, and in some cases exceeded, those of previously described non-enzymatic protocols. Relative to EI-SVF, the mechanical approach showed a lower total cell count but a higher percentage of CD73 + and CD90 + cells. In general, this work contributes to a broader framework for assessing SVF isolation methods by integrating biological performance with practical aspects of clinical workflow.