ArticleCell and tissue banking2026
Contamination rates in umbilical cord Mesenchymal stromal cell cryopreservation: a report from Vinmec tissue bank.
Article in Cell and tissue banking, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Stromal cells hold immense promise for advancing scientific research and medical innovation. The establishment of a biobank for stem cells, specifically umbilical cord (UC)-derived mesenchymal stromal cells (UCMSCs), is crucial for advancing medical research and regenerative therapies. A biobank provides a centralized and standardized repository of high-quality biological materials, which is essential for researchers and clinicians to explore disease mechanisms, test therapeutic approaches, and develop precision treatments. This study applied microbial testing protocols at Vinmec Hospital, including aerobic and anaerobic culture systems (BacT/ALERT® FA Plus and FN Plus), followed by bacterial identification with the VITEK® 2 Compact system, to ensure contamination-free UCMSC samples suitable for banking. A total of 1,336 UC samples were monitored at three check-points (CPs), including CP1 (UC transfer solution during collection), CP2 (cell washing buffer during isolation), and CP3 (cell culture media at P0 and P1 during expansion). Results showed that 29 cases (2.17 %) were contaminated at CP1, and only four cases (0.299 %) at CP2 showed contamination, which were identified as Candida albicans, Staphylococcus epidermidis, Escherichia coli, and Listeria monocytogenes, and were discarded. No contamination occurred at CP3, ensuring effective control during expansion. These results suggest that contamination primarily occurred during the UC collection and processing stages, while the culture and expansion procedures were not a significant source of microbial risk. Additionally, the careful implementation of these methodologies demonstrates the feasibility of generating a reliable UCMSC biobank, a cornerstone resource for personalized therapies, disease modeling, and drug discovery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.