Suppr超能文献

治疗性血浆置换:费森尤斯AS104与COBE光谱仪的配对比较。

Therapeutic plasma exchange: a paired comparison of Fresenius AS104 vs. COBE Spectra.

作者信息

Burgstaler E A, Pineda A A

机构信息

Division of Transfusion Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota 55905, USA.

出版信息

J Clin Apher. 2001;16(2):61-6. doi: 10.1002/jca.1014.

Abstract

For therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE), continuous flow separators are known to be efficient as exemplified by Fresenius AS104 and COBE Spectra. The AS104 uses an interface monitoring system in the centrifuge during TPE, whereas Spectra uses computer algorithms to establish the plasma-cell interface. To determine the plasma collection efficiency (PLCE), anticoagulant (AC) volumes used, and platelets (PLT) lost of the AS104 and the Spectra, we performed a prospective paired comparison of 20 TPE (each machine). The study included 17 patients, 1.3 plasma volume exchanges (without AC), equal inlet rates, and AC ratio of 13:1. Processing times did not include reinfuse mode. Platelet loss was determined by sampling the collection bags. Inlet rates were between 60-110 ml/min. Diagnosis included peripheral neuropathies, TTP and cryoglobulinemia. The AS104 had significantly (P<0.0001) lower average whole blood processed (F:6,601 vs. S:8,584 ml), AC volume (F:532 vs. S:719 ml), and processing time (F:80 vs. S:102 minutes) than Spectra. The AS104 had significantly (P<0.0001) higher average plasma flow rates (F:53 vs. S:44 ml/minute), plasma collection efficiency (F:90 vs. S:69%), and platelet loss (F:2.0 vs. S:0.14 x 10(11) plt) than Spectra. Platelet loss correlated with inlet flow rate with the AS104 but not with the Spectra. The AS104 has a significantly higher collection efficiency than Spectra allowing it to remove the same amount of plasma in significantly less time, by processing significantly less blood, using significantly less AC, but removing significantly more platelets than Spectra.

摘要

对于治疗性血浆置换(TPE),连续流分离器被认为是高效的,费森尤斯AS104和COBE Spectra就是例证。AS104在TPE过程中使用离心机中的界面监测系统,而Spectra使用计算机算法来确定血浆-细胞界面。为了确定AS104和Spectra的血浆采集效率(PLCE)、使用的抗凝剂(AC)体积以及血小板(PLT)损失,我们对20次TPE(每台机器)进行了前瞻性配对比较。该研究包括17名患者,进行1.3个血浆体积置换(不使用AC),进样速率相同,AC比例为13:1。处理时间不包括回输模式。通过对采集袋进行采样来确定血小板损失。进样速率在60 - 110毫升/分钟之间。诊断包括周围神经病变、血栓性血小板减少性紫癜(TTP)和冷球蛋白血症。AS104的平均全血处理量(F:6,601 vs. S:8,584毫升)、AC体积(F:532 vs. S:719毫升)和处理时间(F:80 vs. S:102分钟)均显著低于Spectra(P<0.0001)。AS104的平均血浆流速(F:53 vs. S:44毫升/分钟)、血浆采集效率(F:90 vs. S:69%)和血小板损失(F:2.0 vs. S:0.14×10¹¹血小板)均显著高于Spectra(P<0.0001)。AS104的血小板损失与进样流速相关,而Spectra则不然。AS104的采集效率显著高于Spectra,使其能够在显著更短的时间内去除相同量的血浆,通过处理显著更少的血液,使用显著更少的AC,但比Spectra去除显著更多的血小板。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验