Winters, Jeffrey L

PurposeTerumo BCT Spectra Optia (O) and Fenwal Amicus (A) can perform therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE). We compared these systems in a prospective, randomized, crossover study of 81 paired procedures. Primary objective was to determine if there was a difference in platelet loss between the instruments. Secondary objectives were to determine differences in procedure time (PT), plasma removal efficiency (PRE 1), plasma removal rate (PRR), and fluid balance (FB).MethodsFifty‐seven adults undergoing 162 procedures were included. Diagnoses included neurologic, nephrologic, and hematologic diseases. Replacement fluids included 5% normal serum albumin and/or fresh frozen plasma. The first instrument (randomized) established the inlet flow rate for the second with a maximum inlet rate of 120 ml/min. Spun HCT was used to program the procedure. One plasma volume was exchanged, for both instruments. Multivariable general estimating equations were used to assess the relationship between the outcome variables with machine after adjusting for covariates, with P values <.05 significant.ResultsMedian total blood volume (4,775 mL‐A, 4,775 mL‐O) and preprocedure spun HCT (33%‐A, 34%‐O) were not statistically different. The plasma removed (3196 mL‐A, 3120 mL‐O), PLT in waste plasma (0.62 × 1011‐A, 0.33 × 1011‐O), PLT decline (8.5%‐A, 6.5%‐O), and PRR (48.1 mL/min‐A, 49.2 mL/min‐O) were not statistically different. There were statistically significant, but clinically irrelevant, differences in PLT CE1 (6.2%‐A, 3.6%‐O), PRE 1 (85.3%‐A, 83.9%‐O), FB (+2 mL‐A,+15 mL‐O), and PT (71 min‐A, 71 min‐O).ConclusionsStatistical differences were seen but none were of a magnitude to be clinically relevant, indicating comparable TPE performance.

AbstractAutoimmune hemolytic anemia (AIHA) is an uncommon entity that presents diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic dilemmas despite being a well-recognized entity for over 150 years. This is because of significant differences in the rates of hemolysis and associated diseases and because there is considerable clinical heterogeneity. In addition, there is a lack of clinical trials required to refine and update standardized and evidence-based therapeutic approaches. To aid the clinician in AIHA management, we present four vignettes that represent and highlight distinct clinical presentations with separate diagnostic and therapeutic pathways that we use in our clinical practice setting. We also review the parameters present in diagnostic testing that allow for prognostic insight and present algorithms for both diagnosis and treatment of the AIHA patient in diverse situations. This is done in the hope that this review may offer guidance in regard to personalized therapy recommendations. A section is included for the diagnosis of suspected AIHA with negative test results, a relatively infrequent but challenging situation, in order to assist in the overall evaluation spectrum for these patients.

AbstractThyroid storm or severe thyrotoxicosis results from extreme thyroid hormone elevation. Therapy includes medical management to prevent hormone production, release, recycling, and peripheral conversion while stabilizing adrenergic tone. Thyroid dysfunction is the usual cause but it can be due to excessive thyroid hormone ingestion. Therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) has been used to rapidly remove protein‐bound thyroid hormone. American Society for Apheresis guidelines make a weak recommendation to perform TPE in selected patients in the treatment of thyrotoxicosis based on low quality evidence. We present a case of excessive thyroid replacement hormone ingestion treated by TPE. The patient presented with the clinical picture of thyroid storm, including cardiovascular compromise and massively elevated total and free T3 (525 ng/dL, nl 80–200 ng/dL and 28 pg/mL, nl 2.0–3.5 11 pg/mL), which failed medical therapy. A single, one plasma volume TPE was performed. Both total and free T3 demonstrated substantial declines immediately after TPE with the patient's mental status returning to near‐normal. Thyroid hormone extraction efficiency and collection efficacy were calculated as 37.1% and 40.8%, respectively. Prior to discharge on day 6, the patient's compounding pharmacy indicated that a “bad batch” of bovine thyroid gland derived replacement hormone had been produced. TPE appears to be effective in removing protein bound thyroid hormone in extreme iatrogenic thyrotoxicosis.

AbstractBackgroundFactor XI (FXI) deficiency (hemophilia C [HEM‐C]) is a bleeding disorder with unpredictable severity that correlates poorly with FXI coagulation activity (FXI:C). It poses a perioperative hemostatic management challenge. For US patients with severe disease, fresh frozen plasma (FFP) or, in current use, thawed plasma is the most readily available option but comes with risk of volume overload. We report our experience of using therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) as an alternative perioperative management strategy.MethodsA retrospective review of all HEM‐C patients who underwent surgical procedures. Data were collected, including demographics, bleeding history, surgical site, perioperative hemostatic intervention, and outcome.ResultsBetween July 1997 and September 2014, 28 HEM‐C patients (12 men) were identified, 4 with severe disease (FXI:C <2% or excessive bleeding). Nineteen patients underwent 91 invasive procedures. For nearly 60% of the procedures, no periprocedural hemostatic intervention was provided; before 4 procedures (3 patients), 1 plasma volume TPE preoperatively with FFP was administered. Patient 1, a 28‐year‐old woman (FXI:C, 35%) with a history of excessive surgical bleeding, underwent 2 TPE procedures before laparoscopic pelvic biopsy and subsequent abdominal hysterectomy with salpingo‐oophorectomy that increased her FXI:C to 48%. Patient 2, a 79‐year‐old man (FXI:C, <2%), had TPE before total hip arthroplasty, increasing his FXI:C to 24%. Patient 3, a 59‐year‐old man (FXI:C, <2%), had TPE before prostate laser enucleation, increasing his FXI:C to 46%. Patients 1 and 3 had mild reactions during TPE; no patient had evidence of volume overload. All patients had adequate intraoperative surgical hemostatic outcomes.ConclusionTPE is an effective alternative presurgical hemostatic intervention in HEM‐C with potentially lower risk of circulatory volume overload.

BACKGROUNDHydroxyethyl starch (HES) is reportedly associated with an increased risk of renal failure and death when used for fluid resuscitation in critically ill patients. HES can be used during therapeutic leukocytapheresis (TL) procedures to enhance cell separation. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the occurrence of adverse events associated with HES during TL procedures.STUDY DESIGN AND METHODSWe performed a retrospective review of patients who underwent TL with and without HES in the period 2009 to 2013 at six academic medical institutions.RESULTSA difference‐in‐difference regression analysis was used to estimate the mean change before and after TL in selected outcomes in the HES group relative to the average change in the non‐HES group. Selected outcomes included serum creatinine, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), and white blood cell (WBC) count. A total of 195 patients who underwent 278 TL procedures were studied. We found no significant differences in serum creatinine levels and eGFR on Days 1 and 7 after TL procedure between patients who received and those who did not receive HES. The rate of adverse events and overall and early mortality were similar in both groups. Patients with acute myeloid leukemia who received HES had greater WBC reduction when HES was used. Additionally, patients who received HES had improvement in pulmonary leukostasis symptoms.CONCLUSIONHES, used at low doses during TL procedures, was not associated with adverse events previously ascribed to its use as a volume expander.

SummaryThe initial description of therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) in an animal model was published almost 100 years ago. Since that time, this treatment has been applied to a wide variety of diseases but limited research has been published examining the mechanisms of action ofTPE. The therapeutic effects ofTPEcould include the removal of pathological substances from the blood, such as monoclonal paraproteins and autoantibodies, as well as the replacement of deficient plasma components when plasma is used as a replacement fluid. Beyond these potential mechanisms, other possible mechanisms include possible alterations in lymphocyte proliferation and function that could sensitize these cells to immunosuppressant and chemotherapeutic agents and alterations in the immune system including changes inBandTcell numbers and activation, increasedTsuppressor function, and alteration inT‐helper cell type 1/2 (Th1/Th2) ratio. Much remains unknown about the mechanisms of action ofTPE, indicating a need for basic research into this therapy.

The American Society for Apheresis (ASFA) JCA Special Issue Writing Committee is charged with reviewing, updating and categorizating indications for therapeutic apheresis. Beginning with the 2007 ASFA Special Issue (Fourth Edition), the committee has incorporated systematic review and evidence‐based approach in the grading and categorization of indications. This Sixth Edition of the ASFA Special Issue has further improved the process of using evidence‐based medicine in the recommendations by consistently applying the category and GRADE system definitions, but eliminating the “level of evidence” criteria (from the University HealthCare Consortium) utilized in prior editions given redundancy between GRADE and University HealthCare Consortium systems. The general layout and concept of a fact sheet that was utilized in the Fourth and Fifth Editions, has been largely maintained in this edition. Each fact sheet succinctly summarizes the evidence for the use of therapeutic apheresis in a specific disease entity. This article consists of 78 fact sheets (increased from 2010) for therapeutic indications in ASFA categories I through IV, with many diseases categorized having multiple clinical presentations/situations which are individually graded and categorized. J. Clin. Apheresis 28:145–284, 2013. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

BackgroundThe AMICUS (Fenwal, Inc.) was cleared in the United States for platelet (PLT) and plasma collection in 1996 with subsequent clearances for the collection of other blood products. Although not previously used for therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE), new disposables, software, and hardware were developed to enable TPE on the AMICUS.Study Design and MethodsA multicenter, randomized, nonblinded, crossover paired treatment protocol was performed. Thirty patients with orders for at least two TPE procedures were randomly assigned to the AMICUS or the COBE Spectra (TerumoBCT) for the first treatment. Each patient was crossed over to the other device using the same procedure settings from the first procedure. The primary objective compared efficiency of plasma removal (EPR) with secondary objectives of comparing PLT and hemoglobin (Hb) waste plasma content, coagulation factor and complement activation, fluid balance tracking accuracy, procedure length, and adverse events.ResultsThe EPR for the AMICUS (81.9 ± 7.62%) was superior to that of the COBE Spectra (75.2 ± 6.29%; p = 0.00001). The AMICUS also demonstrated statistically higher fluid balance accuracy (99.84%) compared to that of the COBE Spectra (98.83%; p < 0.0001) and a statistically shorter procedure time (103.9 ± 30.8 vs. 110.5 ± 27.1 min, p < 0.001). No significant differences with regard to PLT and Hb content in the waste plasma, change in patient PLT count, or changes in markers of coagulation and complement cascade activation were seen. Frequency and severity of adverse reactions were similar.ConclusionThe AMICUS separator can effectively perform TPE. The AMICUS demonstrated superior plasma removal efficiency compared to the COBE Spectra with no evidence of significant differences in PLT removal, hemolysis, and coagulation or complement activation.