Suzuki M, Yamane S, Matsugane T, Nobuto T, Azuma N, Nishide T, Shinomiya M, Saito K, Sasaki N, Nosé Y
Tokyo-Tokatsu Clinic Hospital, Chiba, Japan.
Artif Organs. 1996 Apr;20(4):296-302. doi: 10.1111/j.1525-1594.1996.tb04448.x.
A comparative assessment has been made regarding efficacy and safety of the double filtration plasmapheresis (DFPP), thermofiltration (TFPP), and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) adsorptive (PA) methods by making a crossover test on heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia patients. Treatments by DFPP, TFPP (secondary membrane Evalux 5A), and PA (Liposorber LA-40) were carried out 5 times each, with a 2-week interval, in 5 patients with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia. The same plasma separator (Plasmacure PS-60, polysulfone) was used in all cases, and the volume of plasma processed was set at 4 L. High removal rates were obtained of total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, triglycerides TG, and apolipoprotein B (apoB) by all three methods, and no differences were observed. Lipoprotein (a), apoA-2, apoC-3, fibrinogen, and immunoglobulin M (IgM) showed significantly high removal rates by the DFPP and TFPP methods compared with the PA method. The sieving coefficient of albumin and high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol at 2 and 4 L of plasma processed exhibited high permeabilities using all three methods. Supplementing albumin was not necessary. An increase of the transmembrane pressure was observed in 1 case treated by DFPP but was not observed when using the TFPP or PA method. No changes were observed in serum interleukin 1beta (IL-1beta) or tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha) before and after treatment by any of the three methods. No remarkable side effects were observed using either the DFPP or TFPP method. The DFPP and TFPP methods showed efficacy and safety that was not inferior to the PA method in conventional LDL apheresis, and the dead-end method of the filter operation without the discarding of plasma was shown to be possible.
通过对杂合子家族性高胆固醇血症患者进行交叉试验,对双重过滤血浆置换术(DFPP)、热过滤(TFPP)和低密度脂蛋白吸附(PA)方法的疗效和安全性进行了比较评估。对5例杂合子家族性高胆固醇血症患者分别进行了5次DFPP、TFPP(二级膜Evalux 5A)和PA(Liposorber LA - 40)治疗,每次治疗间隔2周。所有病例均使用相同的血浆分离器(Plasmacure PS - 60,聚砜材质),设定处理血浆量为4L。三种方法对总胆固醇、低密度脂蛋白胆固醇、甘油三酯(TG)和载脂蛋白B(apoB)均有较高的去除率,且未观察到差异。与PA方法相比,脂蛋白(a)、apoA - 2、apoC - 3、纤维蛋白原和免疫球蛋白M(IgM)在DFPP和TFPP方法中的去除率显著更高。使用三种方法在处理2L和4L血浆时,白蛋白和高密度脂蛋白(HDL)胆固醇的筛分系数均表现出高通透性,无需补充白蛋白。1例接受DFPP治疗的患者观察到跨膜压升高,但使用TFPP或PA方法时未观察到。三种方法治疗前后血清白细胞介素1β(IL - 1β)或肿瘤坏死因子 - α(TNF - α)均未观察到变化。使用DFPP或TFPP方法均未观察到明显的副作用。DFPP和TFPP方法在传统低密度脂蛋白单采术中显示出不劣于PA方法的疗效和安全性,并且证明了不丢弃血浆的过滤器死端操作方法是可行的。