Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41036500›Full record

ArticleRegenerative therapy2025

Optimized personnel flow with minimal contamination: development and validation of an air-barrier cleanroom for cell products processing.

Mitsuru Mizuno, Hideaki Tani, Kaori Nomura, Daijiro Sone, Kentaro Amano, Gen Tominaga, Yuki Chiba, Ichiro Sekiya

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Regenerative therapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Mitsuru MizunoCenter for Stem Cell and Regenerative Medicine, Institute of Science Tokyo, 1-5-45, Yushima, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8519, Japan.
Hideaki TaniResearch and Development Institute, Takenaka Corporation, 1-5-1, Otsuka, Inzai-shi, Chiba, 270-1395, Japan.
Kaori NomuraManufacturing and Logistics Engineering Division Head Office, Takenaka Corporation, 1-1-1, Shinsuna, Koto-ku, Tokyo, 136-0075, Japan.
Daijiro SoneManufacturing and Logistics Engineering Division Head Office, Takenaka Corporation, 1-1-1, Shinsuna, Koto-ku, Tokyo, 136-0075, Japan.
Kentaro AmanoResearch and Development Institute, Takenaka Corporation, 1-5-1, Otsuka, Inzai-shi, Chiba, 270-1395, Japan.
Gen TominagaManufacturing and Logistics Engineering Division Head Office, Takenaka Corporation, 1-1-1, Shinsuna, Koto-ku, Tokyo, 136-0075, Japan.
Yuki ChibaResearch and Development Institute, Takenaka Corporation, 1-5-1, Otsuka, Inzai-shi, Chiba, 270-1395, Japan.
Ichiro SekiyaCenter for Stem Cell and Regenerative Medicine, Institute of Science Tokyo, 1-5-45, Yushima, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8519, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Cell processing facilities for regenerative medicine require strict prevention of cross-contamination. However, the typically employed sealed, multi-room layout increases energy demands and capital costs due to heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning (HVAC), and restricts staff mobility. We devised a semi-open (SO) cleanroom that eliminated doors between the cell processing room (CPR) and adjoining corridor, while maintaining unidirectional airflow as a barrier. This study rigorously compared four interface variants-plain opening, wing walls, push-pull ventilation, and a conventional swing door-to verify whether operational flexibility can be achieved without compromising particle content performance at the CPR-corridor interface. Methods: Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations reproduced two connected rooms separated by a 900 × 2000-mm Results: CFD showed all layouts leaked ≤0.011 %, with a 1 m/s walking draft, push-pull kept inflow below 0.05 %, halving 500-mm wing-wall performance and outperforming plain openings. The PIV confirmed significant differences in airflow velocity distributions under each condition in the case of the exit. The semi-open layout without doors showed a lower proportion of vectors pointing opposite to the forward direction than the conventional layout in both the exit and entry cases. Particle counts supported this: push-pull transferred 0.013 % of particles on exit, 32.8 % on entry, giving overall migration to the adjacent room of 0.0043 %. Conclusions: The SO cleanroom concept suppresses fluctuations in particle content at the CPR-corridor interface while eliminating physical doors, enabling flexible personnel flow and obviating extra HVAC zones. Push-pull ventilation delivered the most robust containment against walking-induced disturbances, whereas the 500-mm wing walls offered a passive, power-free alternative with moderate protection. With worst-case inter-room transfers below 0.05 %, SO designs can rationally replace conventional door-sealed rooms, substantially reducing energy and construction costs in regenerative medicine manufacturing.

Indexed as

Computational fluid dynamicsCross-contamination controlParticle image velocimetryPush–pull ventilationSemi-open cleanroom

Identifiers

PMID41036500
PMCPMC12481113

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.