ArticleCureus2026
Comparative Evaluation of Hematopoietic Stem Cell Cryopreservation Using Liquid Nitrogen Versus -80°C Storage.
Article in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Hematopoietic stem cell (HSC) cryopreservation is a critical component of cellular therapy, directly influencing transplant outcomes. Although mechanical freezing at -80°C is widely used in resource-limited settings, liquid nitrogen (LN₂) cryopreservation with controlled-rate freezing remains the gold standard for long-term storage. However, comparative data on the efficacy and operational feasibility of these methods remain scarce. This study aimed to compare the efficacy, cellular integrity, and post-thaw CD34⁺ cell recovery of HSC grafts preserved using LN₂ cryopreservation versus -80°C mechanical freezing. Additionally, we sought to validate a controlled-rate freezing protocol and evaluate its clinical applicability within a cell therapy unit. We conducted four experimental trials: (i) validation of a controlled-rate freezing protocol, (ii) assessment of post-thaw recovery in low-cell-density samples, and (iii-iv) a direct comparison between LN₂ and -80°C cryopreservation using paired aliquots. Post-thaw CD34⁺ cell counts were analyzed by flow cytometry using a BD FACSCanto™ II flow cytometer (Becton, Dickinson and Company, Franklin Lakes, NJ, USA), and freezing curves were recorded using a Consarctic® controlled-rate freezer (Consarctic GmbH, Schöllkrippen, Bavaria, Germany) to assess temperature descent consistency. Both cryopreservation methods demonstrated measurable short-term post-thaw CD34⁺ cell recovery. In the comparative experiment, the absolute post-thaw CD34⁺ cell loss was similar (approximately 2 × 10⁶ cells/kg) between the two preservation methods. However, because baseline CD34⁺ cell contents differed between grafts, percentage recovery also differed, and recovery should therefore be interpreted cautiously. Liquid nitrogen cryopreservation provided superior thermal control, as demonstrated by strict adherence to the programmed freezing curve, and eliminated reliance on hydroxyethyl starch (HES) (Voluven®; Fresenius Kabi AG, Bad Homburg, Germany) as a cryoprotective component. No cryobag leakage or contamination was observed during the study. Given the exploratory pilot design and limited sample size, these findings should be considered preliminary and require confirmation in larger studies incorporating direct viability assays and functional assessments. While -80°C cryopreservation remains a viable short-term option, LN₂ cryopreservation offers distinct advantages in thermal stability, cryoprotectant flexibility, and long-term cell viability. Our validated LN₂ protocol meets clinical standards for safety, sustainability, and quality, solidifying its role as the preferred method for high-quality HSC biobanking and transplantation. Further studies incorporating functional assays and extended follow-up are needed to assess long-term engraftment potential.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.