When it comes to autologous fat grafting, there is a topic that cannot be avoided, that is, the survival rate of the graft. The reason why we can’t get around it is because we all think that a high survival rate is a good clinical effect. First look at an example: the same location of the restaurant, A business, think that the high rate of customer seating good, arranged 10 tables, such a situation is full at each meal, A is very happy, think they have a good management, the customer seat rate of 100%, cattle, the end of the month settlement, income of 900U; B business, cognitive different, he found a way to optimize the utilization of the hotel space, set 15 tables, dining about 13 This is the end of the story, the income of the low seating rate is high instead. The same is true for autologous fat transplantation. If the actual number of fat cells needed for a site is 100M, and you transplant 30M, the blood supply and space acceptance capacity of the recipient area (i.e. the transplanted site) will be 70% higher, and these higher capacities will have a great possibility to promote the survival of all the 30M fat cells and achieve a 100% survival rate. Where? The clinical effect of 70M is still missing, is this effect considered good? In fact, the clinical effect is like the revenue of running a restaurant! High patronage does not mean high income, and high survival rate does not mean good clinical effect! A good doctor is able to accurately grasp the actual amount of fat needed in the implantation area and balance the relationship between the survival rate and the clinical effect while taking into account the other circumstances, and prioritize the clinical effect!