Immunoadsorption is well known to selectively remove immunoglobulins and immune complexes from plasma and is applied in a variety of autoimmune diseases and for desensitization before, or at acute rejection after organ transplantation. Performance, safety, and clinical effectiveness of immunoadsorption were the aim of this study. This prospective, noninterventional, multicentre cohort study included patients treated with immunoadsorption (Immunosorba or GLOBAFFIN adsorbers) for any indication. Clinical effectiveness was assessed after termination of the patient's individual treatment schedule. Eighty‐one patients were included, 69 were treated with Immunosorba, 11 with GLOBAFFIN, one patient with both adsorbers. A majority of patients was treated for neurological indications, dilated cardiomyopathy, and before or after kidney or heart transplantation. Mean IgG reduction from pre‐ to post‐treatment was 69.9% ± 11.5% for Immunosorba and 74.1% ± 5.0% for GLOBAFFIN, respectively. The overall IgG reduction over a complete treatment block was 68%–93% with Immunosorba and 62%–90% with GLOBAFFIN depending on the duration of the overall treatment. After termination of the immunoadsorption therapy, an improvement of clinical status was observed in 63.0%, stabilization of symptoms in 29.6%, and a deterioration in 4.9% of patients. Changes in fibrinogen, thrombocytes, and albumin were mostly classified as noncritical. Overall, the treatments were well tolerated. Immunoadsorption in routine clinical practice with both GLOBAFFIN and Immunosorba has been safely performed, was well tolerated by patients, and effective in lowering immunoglobulins with an improvement or maintenance of clinical status, thus represents an additional therapeutic option for therapy refractory immune disorders.
Background: Patients on peritoneal dialysis (PD) may suffer from sodium (Na) and fluid overload, hypertension and increased cardiovascular risk. Low-Na dialysis solution, by increasing the diffusive removal of Na, might improve blood pressure (BP) management. Methods: A glucose-compensated, low-Na PD solution (112 mmol/L Na and 2% glucose) was compared to a standard-Na solution (133 mmol/L Na and 1.5% glucose) in a prospective, randomised, single-blind study in hypertensive patients on PD. One daily exchange of the standard dialysis regimen was substituted by either of the study solutions for 6 months. The primary outcome (response) was defined as either a decrease of 24-h systolic BP (SBP) by ≥6 mmHg or a fall in BP requiring a medical intervention (e.g. a reduction of antihypertensive medication) at 8 weeks. Results: One hundred twenty-three patients were assessed for efficacy. Response criteria were achieved in 34.5% and 29.1% of patients using low- and standard-Na solutions, respectively ( p = 0.51). Small reductions in 24 h, office, and self-measured BP were observed, more marked with low-Na than with standard-Na solution, but only the between-group difference for self-measured SBP and diastolic BP was significant ( p = 0.002 and p = 0.003). Total body water decreased in the low-Na group and increased in the control group, but between-group differences were not significant. Hypotension and dizziness occurred in 27.0% and in 11.1% of patients in the low-Na group and in 16.9% and 4.6% in the control group, respectively. Conclusions: Superiority of low-Na PD solution over standard-Na solution for control of BP could not be shown. The once daily use of a low-Na PD solution was associated with more hypotensive episodes, suggesting the need to reassess the overall concept of how Na-reduced solutions might be incorporated within the treatment schedule.
Objective: The nutritional status of patients on peritoneal dialysis (PD) is influenced by patient- and disease-related factors and lifestyle. This analysis evaluated the association of PD prescription with body composition and patient outcomes in the prospective incident Initiative for Patient Outcomes in Dialysis–Peritoneal Dialysis (IPOD-PD) patient cohort.Design and Methods: In this observational, international cohort study with longitudinal follow-up of 1,054 incident PD patients, the association of PD prescription with body composition was analyzed by using the linear mixed models, and the association of body composition with death and change to hemodialysis (HD) by means of a competing risk analysis combined with a spline analysis. Body composition was regularly assessed with the body composition monitor, a device applying bioimpedance spectroscopy.Results: Age, time on PD, and the use of hypertonic and polyglucose solutions were significantly associated with a decrease in lean tissue index (LTI) and an increase in fat tissue index (FTI) over time. Competing risk analysis revealed a U-shaped association of body mass index (BMI) with the subdistributional hazard ratio (HR) for risk of death. High LTI was associated with a lower subdistributional HR, whereas low LTI was associated with an increased subdistributional HR when compared with the median LTI as a reference. High FTI was associated with a higher subdistributional HR when compared with the median as a reference. Subdistributional HR for risk of change to HD was not associated with any of the body composition parameters. The use of polyglucose or hypertonic PD solutions was predictive of an increased probability of change to HD, and the use of biocompatible solutions was predictive of a decreased probability of change to HD.Conclusion: Body composition is associated with non-modifiable patient-specific and modifiable treatment-related factors. The association between lean tissue and fat tissue mass and death and change to HD in patients on PD suggests developing interventions and patient counseling to improve nutritional markers and, ultimately, patient outcomes.Study Registration: The study has been registered at Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01285726).
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.