Outcomes & case studies
Patient results and case studies
How StemCell Longevita measures and reports outcomes: published success-rate ranges by condition, the scales we track, realistic improvement timelines and our 3/6/12-month follow-up protocol.
How we report outcomes — and what we will not publish
Regenerative medicine attracts a great deal of marketing that patients cannot verify. Our position is deliberately conservative: we publish the outcome ranges reported in peer-reviewed clinical literature for each indication, we state the validated scale each range is measured on, and we describe the follow-up schedule used to record them. We do not publish before-and-after claims, guaranteed results, cure claims, or patient stories without written consent and clinical documentation to support them.
Stem cell and exosome therapy is not a cure for the conditions listed below. Results vary with disease stage, age, general health and protocol, and some patients do not respond. Any figure you read here — on this site or any other — describes a group of patients in published studies, not a promise about your case.
Reviewed by the SCL medical team under our editorial standards.
Published outcome ranges by condition
“Meaningful improvement” means a statistically and clinically significant change on the validated scale listed, not a subjective impression. Each row links to the full evidence page for that indication.
| Condition | Report meaningful improvement | Measured with |
|---|---|---|
| Knee osteoarthritis & joint pain | 70–85% | WOMAC / VAS pain and function scores, MRI cartilage assessment |
| Arthritis & inflammatory joint disease | 65–80% | Joint pain and mobility scales, inflammatory markers |
| Anti-aging & cellular rejuvenation | 75–90% | Energy, sleep and quality-of-life questionnaires, biomarker panels |
| Multiple sclerosis | 60–75% | EDSS score, relapse frequency, fatigue and mobility measures |
| Diabetes & metabolic disease | 60–75% | HbA1c, fasting glucose, C-peptide and insulin requirement |
| Autism spectrum disorder | 60–70% | CARS / ATEC scores and parent-reported behavioural scales |
| Cardiac conditions | 55–70% | Ejection fraction, NYHA class, exercise tolerance |
| Parkinson's disease | 55–70% | UPDRS score, motor fluctuation and daily-function measures |
Sources for every range are listed on the linked condition pages and summarised on scientific evidence.
What a treatment protocol looks like
Outcomes are only interpretable alongside the protocol that produced them. Every patient treated in Istanbul follows the same documented pathway.
Case review before travel
Records, imaging and laboratory results are reviewed by the medical team. Patients whose disease stage or comorbidities make a meaningful response unlikely are told so and are not accepted.
Baseline measurement
The scale relevant to the indication (see the table above) is recorded before treatment, together with any imaging or biomarkers used for comparison later.
Cell product and delivery
Wharton's jelly mesenchymal stem cells and/or exosomes produced in our own GMP-certified laboratory, with dose, viability and sterility documented per batch and the delivery route chosen for the indication.
Structured follow-up
Reviews at 3, 6 and 12 months, coordinated remotely for international patients, repeating the same baseline measurements so change is comparable rather than anecdotal.
More detail: laboratory credentials and quality standards, how to read a cell viability and sterility report, and post-procedure care.
Realistic timeline for results
- Weeks 0–4
- Baseline assessment repeated remotely. Early anti-inflammatory effects may be reported; structural change is not expected yet.
- Weeks 4–12
- The window in which most patients first report change — typically pain, mobility, fatigue or sleep, depending on the condition treated.
- Months 3–6
- First formal outcome review. Imaging or laboratory markers are repeated where they were part of the baseline work-up.
- Months 6–12
- Second review. Response is classified as sustained, partial or non-response, and any further protocol is discussed on that basis.
- Months 12–18
- Long-term follow-up for slowly-responding indications, and the point at which repeat treatment is considered if clinically justified.
Exosome-specific timing is covered in exosome safety and results timeline.
Patient experience and case documentation
Individual case studies are published only where the patient has given written consent and the clinical record supports what is described. Until a case is cleared for publication, the most useful material we can offer is the documented pathway itself and the experience of travelling for treatment.
Ask about outcomes for your own case
Send your records and the medical team will tell you what response is realistic for your disease stage — including when treatment is not advisable.