Quality comparison of umbilical cord blood cryopreserved with conventional versus automated systems

Umbilical cord blood (CB) banks usually freeze and store CB for clinical transplantation using conventional controlled-rate freezer or the automated BioArchive system. The aim of this study is to compare the quality of CB cryopreserved with conventional and automated methods and to make clear the cause of the quality difference between the two methods. The experiment used 80 CB units: 40 were conventionally cryopreserved and the remainder were cryopreserved with a BioArchive. After thawing, the following measures of CB quality were compared: recovery rates of cell count, cell viability of total nucleated cells (TNCs), mononuclear cells (MNCs), and CD34+ cells, as well as colony-forming unit-granulocyte/macrophage (CFU-GM) content. Additionally, processing and storage records were reviewed to quantify the number of exposures of CB units at room temperature (transient warming event, TWE), which was analyzed in relation to CB quality. MNC and CD34+ cell viability were as follows: MNC, 78.2% ± 6.8% (conventional), 81.7% ± 7.2% (automated); CD34+ cell, 90.6% ± 6.9% (conventional), 94.7% ± 3.5% (automated). The absolute CFU-GM content per CB unit was 7.1 × 105 ± 5.9 × 105 with conventional cryopreservation and 12.3 × 105 ± 12.0 × 105 with automated cryopreservation. CBs cryopreserved with BioArchive showed significantly higher MNC and CD34+ cell viability, and CFU-GM content than those conventionally cryopreserved. The CB quality comparison depending on the amount of TWEs showed no significant quality difference between groups that were more exposed to TWEs and groups that were less exposed. CBs cryopreserved with BioArchive were of higher quality than conventionally cryopreserved CBs, and the cause of quality difference might be due to the difference of freezing conditions rather than the TWE effect.