OBJECTIVES: Use of operating rooms (OR) in hospitals contributes significantly to the total cost of inpatient care. Autologous fat grafting (AFG) is a process of re-injecting a patient’s own fat to treat soft tissue defects in surgeries. The objective was to compare the impact of a new AFG system, Revolve versus centrifugation on OR time and costs. METHODS: Data from literature, conference posters and surgeon survey (n=30) were used. Cost of OR included staff wages and facility costs, and adjusted for inflation to 2014 USD. Mean time of completing AFG was estimated using rate and volume of fat injected reported in posters. Inputs required for projection such as mean number of AFG procedures per year for a hospital were obtained from survey. Per case incremental differences in OR cost for Revolve versus centrifugation was estimated by dividing volume of fat injected by rate of AFG and multiplying by OR cost prior to subtracting equipment costs ($495 list price of Revolve per use) and depreciated cost of centrifugation ($10 per use). Annualized difference in costs was also estimated. RESULTS: Base case assumed 100 AFGs per year (150mL of fat injected per case). Mean time to complete AFG was substantially faster using Revolve than centrifugation: 29.1 minutes versus 116.1 minutes (range: 25.1-32.0 versus 104.1-125.8 minutes, respectively). Mean volume of fat injected was greater for Revolve than centrifugation: 210.0mL versus 92.0mL (ranges: 179.0-241.2 versus 82.4-101.2mL, respectively). Consequently, rate of completing AFG was greater with Revolve than centrifugation: 5.2mL/min versus 1.3mL/min (range: 4.7-6.0 versus 1.2-1.4mL/min, respectively). Estimated cost savings for Revolve versus centrifugation was $2,075 per case and $207,476 per year. CONCLUSIONS: As popularity of AFG increases, evaluating economic impact of AFG systems becomes essential. Based on current findings, Revolve system results in substantial OR time and cost savings compared to centrifugation.