Apheresis

The removal of pathologic humors by various methods is an ancient medical remedy used in the management of diseases whose pathophysiology is poorly understood and whose effective treatment modalities are lacking. The contemporary means for such an approach involves apheresis, which is now possible due to advances in blood banking technologies. Apheresis has been used in most of the major rheumatic diseases, in particular systemic lupus erythematosus and rheumatoid arthritis. Although numerous case reports describe clinical benefits of apheresis in rheumatologic disorders, data from clinical trials are discouraging and suggest a limited role for apheresis in rheumatic disease management.     

不稳定性斑块的研究进展

不稳定性斑块破裂是导致急性冠脉综合征的主要发病机制。不稳定斑块的破裂是内在因素和外在因素共同作用的结果，对其早期识别的技术手段正日臻完善，人们正探索建立不稳定斑块的动物模型及有效的干预手段。     

动脉粥样硬化不稳定斑块的研究进展

动脉粥样硬化不稳定斑块的破裂是冠心病急性冠脉综合征的主要原因之一。对不稳定斑块的形态特点及病理生理特性的研究,对提高急性冠脉综合征的诊断治疗水平,预防急性冠脉综合征的发生具有重要的临床意义。可通过对动物动脉的物理、化学及生物的损伤建立起不稳定斑块的动物模型,目前对不稳定斑块的研究主要通过建立动物模型。不稳定斑块有其特点:大的脂核、薄的纤维帽、大量炎性细胞浸润及细胞因子如:基质金属蛋白酶、肿瘤坏死因子-α参与等。     

关于脂联素与易损斑块相关性的研究进展

所谓易损斑块是指易于破裂的高风险斑块,有别于引起管腔狭窄,导致稳定型心绞痛的斑块。此种斑块具有独特的组织学特性,由脂质核心、薄纤维帽等构成,并伴有血管壁的正性重构。而脂联素是一种脂肪因子,几乎参与到了从易损斑块形成至破裂的全部过程。目前更有大量研究指出,血清脂联素水平的降低同日益增长的冠状动脉疾病尤其是急性冠状动脉综合征的发病率密切相关。脂联素能够解释冠状动脉疾病病理进程中所涉及的炎症及动脉粥样硬化机制。     

Apheresis of Immune Diseases and Apheresis Using Immunological Specificity

Abstract: It has been clearly shown that autoimmune diseases can be treated by apheresis by eliminating immune complexes, however, the effects of therapeutic apheresis are not limited to immune disorders. Almost all diseases are associated with immune systems. Immune systems can be regulated by advanced techniques of apheresis, including immunoadsorption and immunocytapheresis, removing immune effector molecules and various immune‐associated cells selectively. Therefore, apheresis can be used as a nondrug treatment for many diseases. In addition, disease‐associated proteins that cause disease or are produced in the course of diseases and accumulate in the body could be eliminated selectively by apheresis using the extremely powerful ability of the immune system to recognize polypeptide structures specifically and distinguish miniscale differences among molecules. In this article, we discuss the current status of treatment of immune diseases by apheresis and possible treatment approach of a variety of diseases by apheresis based on immune reactions.     

Therapeutic Apheresis in Malignancy

Abstract: Plasmapheresis (PP), staphylococcal protein A immunoadsorption (SPI), and extracorporeal photochemotherapy (EP) have been utilized in cancer treatment for about 20 years. PP removes immune complexes and induces a temporary increase in T4/T8 ratio, natural killer cell activity, and blastogenic responses. SPI removes immune complexes, enhances lymphocytic responses, and activates complement. EP increases lysis of circulating lymphoma cells by CD8+ cytotoxic T cells and increases tumor necrosis factor production by host monocytes. PP induces partial remission in about 28% of patients, but this remission is short lived. SPI gives similar results. Addition of PP to chemotherapy has been reported to prolong survival in patients with multiple myeloma. EP appears useful in treating cutaneous T cell lymphomas with 25% of patients achieving complete response and 50% of patients attaining partial remission. Thus, PP and SPI induce short-lived immune responses, but have no proven clinical utility. EP may be useful in the treatment of cutaneous T cell lymphomas.     

Apheresis in Lupus Nephritis

Abstract: Systemic lupus erythematosus is a chronic autoimmune disease which commonly involves the kidneys. Despite great improvement in survival over the past years due to immunosuppressive therapy, renal failure remains an important cause of morbidity and mortality. In view of the pathogenesis of lupus nephritis, the use of less toxic and more specific ways of treatment such as the extracorporeal removal of pathogenetically relevant autoantibodies seems rational. On the basis of currently available studies, plasma exchange used alone or as an adjunct to conventional immunosuppressive therapy offers no clear benefit over standard immunosuppression in patients with active lupus nephritis and therefore cannot be recommended. However, although not proven, plasmapheresis might be beneficial in patients with acute life‐threatening disease, for which high‐dose immunosuppressive therapy may not be possible, or as an adjunct procedure for patients not responding to conventional therapy. Rather than the unselective removal of plasma, adsorption procedures allow the selective or specific removal of immunoglobulins, which seems to be a more reasonable approach in lupus nephritis. The results of the first clinical trials using different adsorption columns seem promising, but their use cannot be recommended until well‐designed, case‐controlled studies have been performed to prove their usefulness and cost effectiveness in lupus nephritis. So far, clear‐cut recommendations regarding type of adsorption column, intensity and duration of treatment, and accompanying immunosuppressive treatment cannot be given.     

Apheresis Technologies and Clinical Applications: The 2007 International Apheresis Registry

The developments in apheresis technologies and techniques and their clinical applications worldwide are technologically, sociologically, and economically motivated. As in the past apheresis surveys, the statistics have highlighted both the differences by geographic region in clinical practice and in the type of technologies utilized. While a national view of apheresis is very important, an international view may be more representative overall of this therapeutic modality than national results that are highly dependent on the local economics and the available technologies. These regional differences have provided a basis for scientific and clinical assessment of these apheresis technologies and their clinical outcomes, and have impacted the marketing and business developments of new technologies worldwide. The results of the International Apheresis Registry for 2007 report data from 20 centers on five continents. The survey collected data exclusively via a secure internet website on 1735 patients for a total of 6787 treatments. As with our prior registry for 2005, information on stem cell infusions was gathered. Information collected included patients demographics, medical history, treatment diagnoses, treatment specifics (type, methodology, access type, anticoagulants, drugs, and equipment usage), side effects, clinical response, and payment provider. As in prior International Apheresis Registries for 1983, 2000, 2002, and 2005, the survey results highlight the regional differences in apheresis usage and treatment methodologies indicating that an international overview of apheresis may be more representative of the impact of this therapeutic modality.     

Apheresis Technologies and Clinical Applications: The 2000 International Apheresis Registry

Abstract: The developments in apheresis technologies and techniques and their clinical applications worldwide are technologically, sociologically, and economically driven. In the past, apheresis survey statistics have highlighted both the differences by geographical region in clinical practices and in the types of technologies utilized. While a national view of apheresis is critically important, an international view of apheresis may be more representative overall of this therapeutic modality than national results that are highly dependent on the local economics and the available technologies. These regional differences have provided a basis for the scientific and clinical assessments of these apheresis technologies and their clinical outcomes and have impacted the marketing and business developments of new technologies worldwide. The results of the International Apheresis Registry for 2000 reporting on 39 centers on 4 continents are presented. This survey collected data on 1,080 patients for a total of 15,257 treatments. Information gathered included patient demographics, medical history, treatment diagnoses, treatment specifics (type, methodology, access type, anticoagulants, drugs, equipment usage), side effects, clinical response, and payment provider. As in the prior International Apheresis Registry for 1983, the survey results highlighted the regional differences in apheresis usage and treatment specifics, indicating that an international overview of apheresis may be more representative of the impact of this therapeutic modality.     

Therapeutic Apheresis and Dialysis

Official Peer Reviewed Journal of The International Society for Apheresis The Japanese Society for Apheresis The Japanese Society for Dialysis Therapy     

Apheresis technologies and clinical applications: the 2005 International Apheresis Registry

The developments in apheresis technologies and techniques and their clinical applications worldwide are technologically, sociologically, and economically motivated. In past apheresis surveys the statistics have highlighted both the differences by geographic region in clinical practice and in the types of technologies utilized. While a national view of apheresis is very important, an international view may be more representative overall of this therapeutic modality than national results that are highly dependent on the local economics and the available technologies. These regional differences have provided a basis for scientific and clinical assessment of these apheresis technologies and their clinical outcomes, and have impacted the marketing and business developments of new technologies worldwide. The results of the International Apheresis Registry for 2005 reporting from 22 centers on 5 continents are presented. The survey collected data exclusively via a secure internet website on 1133 patients for a total of 6501 treatments. Unlike our prior registries, information on stem cell infusions was gathered. Information gathered included patient demographics, medical history, treatment diagnoses, treatment specifics (type, methodology, access type, anticoagulants, drugs, and equipment usage), side-effects, clinical response, and payment provider. As in the prior International Apheresis Registries for 1983, 2000, and 2002 the survey results highlight the regional differences in apheresis usage and treatment methodologies, indicating that an international overview of apheresis may be more representative of the impact of this therapeutic modality.