Search

There have been a number of reports suggesting that LDL apheresis, including LDL adsorption and double filtration plasmapheresis (DFPP), can be applied for the treatment of lower extremity peripheral arterial disease (PAD) in hemodialysis patients, whereas there is no definitive recommendation for the use of LDL apheresis.The change of skin perfusion pressure (SPP) during LDL apheresis was measured in every single treatment to determine the effect of LDL adsorption and DFPP on improving blood flow in lower extremity PAD hemodialysis patients. Eleven hemodialysis patients treated with more than two series of LDL apheresis were involved in the study. "One series" included 10 treatments of LDL apheresis according to the Japanese health care insurance system.In total, 320 treatments (32 series) of LDL apheresis were performed utilizing either LDL adsorption or DFPP treatment in 11 patients. The SPP values pre- and post-apheresis were recorded in 315 treatments (228 LDL adsorption and 87 DFPP). The SPP was significantly improved after both LDL adsorption (P .001) and DFPP (P = .002) treatment. The median change of SPP was significantly larger in the LDL adsorption group (12.6 mm Hg, range: -48.5, 77.0 mm Hg) than in the DFPP group (6.7 mm Hg, range: -42.0, 72.5 mm Hg) (P = .003). The LDL adsorption consistently offered a significant increase in the SPP, whereas DFPP treatment seemed to have modest effects on the improvement of SPP compared to the LDL adsorption.These data indicate that LDL adsorption should be considered the primary LDL apheresis therapy for lower extremity PAD in hemodialysis patients to achieve improvement of blood flow.

Twice-weekly intensive granulocyte/monocyte adsorptive apheresis is effective and safe for ulcerative colitis, but maintaining two blood access routes is problematic. We previously reported that intensive granulocyte/monocyte adsorptive apheresis using a single needle in ulcerative colitis is effective and safe. We hypothesized that the efficacy and safety of single-needle intensive granulocyte/monocyte adsorptive apheresis for ulcerative colitis would especially benefit the elderly. We enrolled 17 elderly ulcerative colitis patients to receive single-needle intensive granulocyte/monocyte adsorptive apheresis, 27 elderly ulcerative colitis patients to receive double-needle intensive granulocyte/monocyte adsorptive apheresis, and 52 nonelderly ulcerative colitis patients to receive single-needle intensive granulocyte/monocyte adsorptive apheresis. Remission and mucosal healing rates after treatment did not differ significantly between elderly ulcerative colitis patients receiving single-needle apheresis and the other two groups. In addition, no serious adverse effects, including blood clots, were observed in single-needle intensive granulocyte/monocyte adsorptive apheresis patients. Single-needle intensive granulocyte/monocyte adsorptive apheresis might be a novel alternative therapeutic option for elderly ulcerative colitis patients before considering corticosteroids.

Intensive granulocyte and monocyte adsorptive apheresis (GMA) twice weekly is effective and safe for patients with active ulcerative colitis (UC), but the requirement for maintaining two blood access routes is problematic. Here we compared the efficacy and safety of one-route blood access intensive GMA using a single-needle (SN) and conventional two-route blood access intensive GMA using a double-needle (DN) in patients with active UC not undergoing corticosteroid therapy. Among 80 active UC patients, 38 patients received SN intensive GMA and 42 patients received DN intensive GMA. The clinical remission ratio and mucosal healing ratio at 6 weeks, and the cumulative non-relapse ratio at 52 weeks did not differ significantly between groups. In addition, no serious or mild adverse effects were observed in SN intensive GMA. SN intensive GMA may be an adequate and novel therapeutic option for active UC as an alternative therapy before using corticosteroids.