While stem cell therapy is becoming widely recognized as a field of regenerative medicine, there is still limited shared understanding of how treatment quality should be evaluated. Even when searching terms such as “stem cell therapy effectiveness,” “stem cell therapy safety,” or “where to receive stem cell therapy,” much of the available information remains abstract, offering few concrete criteria for assessing the actual content of the treatment.

However, stem cell therapy includes a critical process that can directly influence treatment outcomes. This process is known as “storage management.”

In this column, we review the entire process of stem cell therapy and focus in particular on “storage management” and “cell viability,” organizing key perspectives for evaluating treatment quality in a rational manner. Storage is not the sole determining factor, but it is an important checkpoint that cannot be overlooked and is closely related to the therapeutic potential.

Differences in stem cell therapy arise after the culture phase

Autologous adipose-derived stem cell therapy is carried out through the following steps.

• Collection of adipose tissue
• Isolation of stem cells
• Cell expansion through culture
• Reaching a state suitable for administration
• Storage management until administration

Among these steps, the fifth step, “storage management,” is often difficult for patients to observe and may not be fully explained. In practice, administration does not always occur immediately after culture is completed. Waiting periods may arise due to the patient’s condition, scheduling, or treatment planning.

During this waiting period, stem cells are placed in a controlled storage environment, and differences in these conditions can affect cell status. In other words, storage is not an exception but a structurally integrated step in stem cell therapy.

Treatment quality is shaped by the entire process

The quality of stem cell therapy is formed through the series of steps including collection, isolation, culture, storage, and administration. Among these, the storage phase determines whether the quality of already prepared cells can be maintained. Storage does not determine everything, but it plays a critical role in whether cell quality can be preserved until delivery.

For this reason, storage conditions and cell viability are important indicators when evaluating treatment quality.

Differences in storage methods affect the stability of cell viability

The primary storage methods for stem cells are refrigerated storage and cryopreservation.

• Refrigerated storage

  Refrigerated storage is relatively easy to implement, but cellular activity does not completely stop. Over time, cellular stress and degradation may accumulate, potentially leading to variability in cell viability.

• Cryopreservation

  Cryopreservation temporarily halts cellular activity, allowing cells to be maintained in a stable state. However, if freezing and thawing processes are not properly managed, the risk of cell damage may increase.

What matters most is not the storage method itself, but the level of control and management applied throughout the entire storage process.

Comparative viability testing conducted at our clinic

At Tokyo Ginza Wellness & Aging Clinic, comparative viability tests between refrigerated storage and cryopreservation have been conducted in our in-house cell culture facility.

Cell viability was measured at 0, 6, 24, and 48 hours after the start of storage, with the following results.

While the refrigerated group showed significant fluctuations in viability over time, the cryopreserved group maintained relatively stable viability even after 48 hours.

These results suggest that storage conditions can influence the proportion of functionally viable cells at the time of administration.

Cell viability is an indirect indicator of treatment quality

High cell viability does not guarantee treatment outcomes. The results of stem cell therapy depend on multiple factors, including patient condition, treatment site, and therapeutic objectives.

Nevertheless, cell viability serves as an important indirect indicator when assessing treatment quality.

• Higher viability indicates a greater number of functional cells
• A greater number of functional cells suggests higher regenerative potential

From a medical perspective, this relationship is considered reasonable.

Our clinic’s strength lies in process design that delivers stable, high-quality cells

The strength of Tokyo Ginza Wellness & Aging Clinic is not simply the use of cryopreservation, but the comprehensive design of processes that allow high-quality stem cells to be cultured and maintained in a stable condition until administration.

• Precise control of culture environments
• Optimization of pre-freezing preparation
• Freezing processes with controlled temperature gradients
• Standardization of thawing speed and handling procedures

By consistently managing these processes, we aim to deliver cultured stem cells without compromising their quality through to administration.

This integrated process design, including storage management, underpins the stability of cell viability.

Key perspectives when evaluating stem cell therapy

When considering stem cell therapy, it is important to confirm the following points.

• Whether storage methods and viability data are disclosed
• Whether storage processes are explained in concrete terms
• Whether quality control systems are established at the process level

If this information is not provided, it becomes difficult to fully understand the substance of the treatment.

The essence of stem cell therapy lies in the condition at administration

The value of stem cell therapy is influenced by the condition of the cells at the time of administration. Quality is defined not by quantity, but by condition.

Whether the invisible process of storage management is visualized and presented with objective data reflects the medical institution’s overall approach.

At Tokyo Ginza Wellness & Aging Clinic, we position storage management as a core element of treatment quality and work to enhance the reliability of regenerative medicine.

Conclusion

The quality of stem cell therapy is not determined by a single factor. Appropriate management of the entire process from collection to administration is essential. Within this framework, storage management and cell viability serve as practical indicators for evaluating therapeutic potential.

Stem cell therapy should not be chosen based on impression alone. How storage management is designed and controlled plays a significant role in treatment quality.

When considering treatment, attention should be paid not only to visible information but also to the “invisible” process of storage. This perspective supports informed and confident decision-making in regenerative medicine.