Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Sepsis remains a common condition with high mortality when multiple organ failure develops. The evidence for therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) in this setting is promising but inconclusive. Our study aims to evaluate the efficacy of adjunct TPE for septic shock with multiple organ failure compared to standard therapy alone. Methods A retrospective, observational chart review was performed, evaluating outcomes of patients with catecholamine-resistant septic shock and multiple organ failure in intensive care units at a tertiary care hospital in Winston-Salem, NC, from August 2015 to March 2019. Adult patients with catecholamine-resistant septic shock (≥ 2 vasopressors) and evidence of multiple organ failure were included. Patients who received adjunct TPE were identified and compared to patients who received standard care alone. A propensity score using age, gender, chronic co-morbidities (HTN, DM, CKD, COPD), APACHE II score, SOFA score, lactate level, and number of vasopressors was used to match patients, resulting in 40 patients in each arm. Results The mean baseline APACHE II and SOFA scores were 32.5 and 14.3 in TPE patients versus 32.7 and 13.8 in control patients, respectively. The 28-day mortality rate was 40% in the TPE group versus 65% in the standard care group ( p  = 0.043). Improvements in baseline SOFA scores at 48 h were greater in the TPE group compared to standard care alone ( p  = 0.001), and patients receiving adjunct TPE had a more favorable fluid balance at 48 h ( p  = 0.01). Patients receiving adjunct TPE had longer ICU and hospital lengths of stay ( p  = 0.003 and p  = 0.006, respectively). Conclusions Our retrospective, observational study in adult patients with septic shock and multiple organ failure demonstrated improved 28-day survival with adjunct TPE compared to standard care alone. Hemodynamics, organ dysfunction, and fluid balance all improved with adjunct TPE, while lengths of stay were increased in survivors. The study design does not allow for a generalized statement of support for TPE in all cases of sepsis with multiple organ failure but offers valuable information for a prospective, randomized clinical trial.

The post-COVID-19 condition (PCC) is a highly debilitating and persistent postinfectious syndrome that affects millions of people worldwide and has no effective treatment. Therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) has the potential to improve the PCC by clearing the peripheral soluble pro-inflammatory immune milieu derived from acute or persistent SARS-CoV-2 infection. In a phase II, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial, fifty subjects with PCC were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive six sessions of either TPE or a sham plasma exchange and were followed for 90 days (ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT05445674). The primary endpoint was safety; secondary endpoints included functional status, symptomology, quality of life, neurocognitive symptoms, and peripheral biochemistry, hematology, coagulation and inflammation parameters. Both study arms had a similarly favorable safety profile. There were no diferences between groups in any of the efficacy parameters evaluated. Whereas TPE is safe, it did not lead to any discernible improvement of the PCC in this clinical trial. Here, the authors report results from a clinical trial testing whether therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) can help people with post-COVID-19 condition (PCC). While TPE had a favorable safety profile, it didn’t improve symptoms or quality of life for people with PCC.

We conducted a randomized, placebo‐controlled trial to assess the safety and biological age (BA) effects of various therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) regimens in healthy adults over 50. Participants received bi‐weekly TPE with or without intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG), monthly TPE, or placebo. Randomization was based on entry date, and treatments were blinded to maintain objectivity. Primary objectives were to assess long‐term TPE safety and changes in biological clocks. Secondary goals included identifying optimal regimens. Exploratory analyses profiled baseline clinical features and longitudinal changes across the epigenome, proteome, metabolome, glycome, immune cytokines, iAge, and immune cell composition. We demonstrate in 42 individuals randomized to various treatment arms or placebo that long‐term TPE was found to be safe, with only two adverse events requiring discontinuation and one related to IVIG. TPE significantly improved biological age markers, with 15 epigenetic clocks showing rejuvenation compared to placebo (FDR < 0.05). Biweekly TPE combined with intravenous immunoglobulin (TPE‐IVIG) proved most effective, inducing coordinated cellular and molecular responses, reversing age‐related immune decline, and modulating proteins linked to chronic inflammation. Integrative analysis identified baseline biomarkers predictive of positive outcomes, suggesting TPE‐IVIG is particularly beneficial for individuals with poorer initial health status. This is the first multi‐omics study to examine various TPE modalities to slow epigenetic biologic clocks, which demonstrate biological age rejuvenation and the molecular features associated with this rejuvenation. Trial Registration: Registered trial NCT06534450 on clinicaltrials.gov under the purview of the Diagnostic Investigational Review Board. Therapeutic plasma exchange safely reduces biological age by up to 2.6 years. Multi‐omics analysis reveals coordinated cellular and molecular responses associated with aging rejuvenation.

Therapeutic apheresis has emerged as a major treatment option for autoantibody-associated inflammatory diseases of the nervous system. This includes patients with autoimmune encephalitides caused by antibodies against neuronal proteins. Plasma exchange (PE) and immunoadsorption (IA) constitute two possibilities to eliminate pathogenic antibodies from patients’ plasma, but their efficacy and safety has not been prospectively assessed in larger patient groups of autoimmune encephalitides. In a prospective observational case control study, we, therefore, investigated the disease courses and treatment effects of 21 patients with autoimmune encephalitis associated with NMDAR, LGI1, CASPR2, GAD, mGluR5 and Hu antibodies. Patients were randomly assigned to receive PE ( n  = 11) or IA ( n  = 10). Symptoms were evaluated using the modified Rankin Scale (mRS). Side effects or adverse events were recorded. Both interventions, IA ( p  = 0.014) and PE ( p  = 0.01), resulted in significant reduction of the median mRS. With IA, 60 % of the patients improved clinically by at least 1 mRS score, none worsened. PE led to a comparable symptom reduction in 67 % of the cases. During 83 PE sessions, three adverse events were documented, while no side effects occurred under IA. Symptom improvement was significantly associated with younger age ( r  = −0.58), but not with disease duration. Therapeutic apheresis was most effective for neuronal surface antigens (83.3 %), followed by intracellular-synaptic antigens (66.7 %). Both IA and PE resulted in moderate to marked clinical improvement, with a low rate of adverse events. Apheresis is well tolerated and effective also as first-line therapy in autoimmune encephalitis, particularly in patients with antibodies targeting neuronal surfaces.

The mortality rate of sepsis-associated disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) is high. This study aimed to explore the efficacy of therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) in sepsis-associated DIC patients by improving endothelial function. A total of 112 sepsis-associated DIC patients were randomly divided into the TPE group (n = 40), the heparin (HP) group (n = 36), and the SHAM group (n = 36). The SHAM group received conventional treatment; the HP group was treated with HP based on conventional treatment; and the TPE group received conventional treatment plus TPE. The differences in thromboelastogram (TEG), platelet (PLT), coagulation function, and the endothelial cell (EC) injury biomarkers at 6 h, 24 h, 48 h, 72 h, and 7 days after TPE were compared among the three groups, and the three groups were compared in terms of Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) score, Sepsis-Related Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score, the length of intensive care unit (ICU) hospitalization, 28-day mortality rate, 28-day cumulative survival rate, the incidence of bleeding events, the incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI), and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The efficacy of TPE is superior to the HP in increasing PLT, improving coagulation function, increasing the 28-day cumulative survival rate, and reducing the length of ICU hospitalization, 28-day mortality, and the incidence of bleeding events, AKI, and ARDS with statistically significant differences (P < .05). Moreover, the effect of TPE outperforms HP on the EC injury biomarkers with statistically significant differences (P < .05). Our results suggest that TPE may be more effective than HP in the treatment of patients with sepsis-associated DIC. The possible mechanism is via improving endothelial function.

COVID-19 disease is associated with a hyperinflammatory, pro-thrombotic state and a high mortality. Our primary objective was to assess the change in inflammatory and thrombotic markers associated with PEX, and secondary objectives were to assess the effects of PEX on progression of respiratory failure and incidence of acute thrombotic events. We conducted a prospective, phase II, non-blinded randomised control trial of plasma exchange compared to standard of care in critically ill adults with severe COVID-19 associated respiratory failure, requiring supplemental oxygen or ventilatory support and elevated thrombo-inflammatory markers (LDH, CRP, ferritin, and D-Dimer). Patients randomised to receive PEX were treated with a daily single volume plasma exchange for a minimum of five days. Twenty-two patients were randomised of who 11 received PEX. Demographic and clinical characteristics were similar between groups at presentation. PEX was associated with a significant reduction in pro-thrombotic markers FVIII, VWF and VWF Ag: ADAMTS 13 ratio ( p  < 0.001). There were no differences in the reduction of inflammatory markers, severity of respiratory failure ( p  = 0.7), thrombotic events ( p  = 0.67), or mortality ( p  > 0.99) at 28 days. PEX successfully reduced pro-thrombotic markers, although was not associated with reduction in inflammatory markers, respiratory failure, or thrombotic events. Trial registration : (NCT04623255); first posted on 10/11/2020.

Purpose This study was designed to detect structural and functional brain changes in Alzheimer’s disease (AD) patients treated with therapeutic plasma exchange (PE) with albumin replacement, as part of the recent AMBAR phase 2b/3 clinical trial. Methods Mild-to-moderate AD patients were randomized into four arms: three arms receiving PE with albumin (one with low-dose albumin, and two with low/high doses of albumin alternated with IVIG), and a placebo (sham PE) arm. All arms underwent 6 weeks of weekly conventional PE followed by 12 months of monthly low-volume PE. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) volumetric analyses and regional and statistical parametric mapping (SPM) analysis on 18 F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography ( 18 FDG-PET) were performed. Results MRI analyses ( n  = 198 patients) of selected subcortical structures showed fewer volume changes from baseline to final visit in the high albumin + IVIG treatment group ( p  < 0.05 in 3 structures vs. 4 to 9 in other groups). The high albumin + IVIG group showed no statistically significant reduction of right hippocampus. SPM 18 FDG-PET analyses ( n  = 213 patients) showed a worsening of metabolic activity in the specific areas affected in AD (posterior cingulate, precuneus, and parieto-temporal regions). The high-albumin + IVIG treatment group showed the greatest metabolic stability over the course of the study, i.e., the smallest percent decline in metabolism (MaskAD), and least progression of defect compared to placebo. Conclusions PE with albumin replacement was associated with fewer deleterious changes in subcortical structures and less metabolic decline compared to the typical of the progression of AD. This effect was more marked in the group treated with high albumin + IVIG. Trial registration (AMBAR trial registration: EudraCT#: 2011–001,598-25; ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT01561053).

Immunological disturbances (anti-type I IFN auto-antibody production, cytokine storm, lymphopenia, T-cell hyperactivation and exhaustion) are responsible for disease exacerbation during severe COVID-19 infections. In this study, we set up a prospective, randomised clinical trial (ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT04751643) and performed therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) in severe COVID-19 patients in order to decrease excess cytokines and auto-antibodies and to assess whether adding TPE to the standard treatment (ST, including corticosteroids plus high-flow rate oxygen) could help restore immune parameters and limit the progression of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). As expected, performing TPE decreased the amount of anti-type I IFN auto-antibodies and improved the elimination or limited the production of certain inflammatory mediators (IL-18, IL-7, CCL2, CCL3, etc.) circulating in the blood of COVID-19 patients, compared to ST controls. Interestingly, while TPE did not influence changes in ARDS parameters throughout the protocol, it proved more effective than ST in reversing lymphopenia, preventing T-cell hyperactivation and reducing T-cell exhaustion, notably in a fraction of TPE patients who had an early favourable respiratory outcome. TPE also restored appropriate numbers of CD4+ and CD8+ T-cell memory populations and increased the number of circulating virus-specific T cells in these patients. Our results therefore indicate that the addition of TPE sessions to the standard treatment accelerates immune cell recovery and contributes to the development of appropriate antiviral T-cell responses in some patients with severe COVID-19 disease.

Objective There is extensive literature indicating that inflammatory pathways are affected in Alzheimer's disease (AD). We examined whether plasma exchange with albumin replacement (PE‐Alb) can impact the inflammatory status of AD patients and alter the relationship between inflammatory mediators and cognitive measures. Methods Serum and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) samples from 142 AD patients participating in the AMBAR trial (14‐month schedule of PE‐Alb treatment vs. placebo [sham PE‐Alb]) were analyzed for changes from baseline for 19 inflammatory mediators (6 inflammatory cytokines, 9 chemokines, and 4 vascular injury indicators) at representative time points across the AMBAR study (lasting effects) as well as in pre‐ versus post‐PE‐Alb procedure (acute effects). Association between mediator changes and clinical outcomes reported in the AMBAR study (cognitive, functional, behavioral function, and global change tests) was assessed. Results PE‐Alb significantly reduced IFN‐γ, eotaxin, MIP‐1α and ICAM‐1 levels in serum, and eotaxin‐3 and MIP‐1β levels in CSF, at various time points during treatment (p < 0.05; false discovery rate‐corrected). Vascular injury indicators were the mediators mostly affected by post‐ versus pre‐PE‐Alb level reduction. Increased serum MIP‐1α levels were associated with worsening in ADAS‐Cog, CDR‐sb, and ADCS‐CGIC scores in the placebo group, but not in the PE‐Alb‐treated group. Interpretation Peripheral intervention could affect AD by reducing inflammatory mediators in both peripheral and central compartments. Changes in MIP‐1α due to PE‐Alb were associated with changes in clinical outcomes.

In this narrative review, we discuss the relevant issues of therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) in critically ill patients. For many conditions, the optimal indication, device type, frequency, duration, type of replacement fluid and criteria for stopping TPE are uncertain. TPE is a potentially lifesaving but also invasive procedure with risk of adverse events and complications and requires close monitoring by experienced teams. In the intensive care unit (ICU), the indications for TPE can be divided into (1) absolute, well-established, and evidence-based, for which TPE is recognized as first-line therapy, (2) relative, for which TPE is a recognized second-line treatment (alone or combined) and (3) rescue therapy, where TPE is used with a limited or theoretical evidence base. New indications are emerging and ongoing knowledge gaps, notably regarding the use of TPE during critical illness, support the establishment of a TPE registry dedicated to intensive care medicine.