Apheresis Technologies and Clinical Applications: The 2007 International Apheresis Registry

Abstract

The developments in apheresis technologies and techniques and their clinical applications worldwide are technologically, sociologically, and economically motivated. As in the past apheresis surveys, the statistics have highlighted both the differences by geographic region in clinical practice and in the type of technologies utilized. While a national view of apheresis is very important, an international view may be more representative overall of this therapeutic modality than national results that are highly dependent on the local economics and the available technologies. These regional differences have provided a basis for scientific and clinical assessment of these apheresis technologies and their clinical outcomes, and have impacted the marketing and business developments of new technologies worldwide. The results of the International Apheresis Registry for 2007 report data from 20 centers on five continents. The survey collected data exclusively via a secure internet website on 1735 patients for a total of 6787 treatments. As with our prior registry for 2005, information on stem cell infusions was gathered. Information collected included patients demographics, medical history, treatment diagnoses, treatment specifics (type, methodology, access type, anticoagulants, drugs, and equipment usage), side effects, clinical response, and payment provider. As in prior International Apheresis Registries for 1983, 2000, 2002, and 2005, the survey results highlight the regional differences in apheresis usage and treatment methodologies indicating that an international overview of apheresis may be more representative of the impact of this therapeutic modality.

Influence of vascular access devices upon efficiency of therapeutic plasma exchange

“…In this study, 64% of TPE could be performed by using PVC. This rate is consistent with those reported in French or international apheresis registries . PVC is the access of choice, as it is easier to insert, and associated with low rate of complications.…”

Efficacy, safety, and tolerability of long-term lipoprotein apheresis in patients with LDL- or Lp(a) hyperlipoproteinemia: Findings gathered from more than 36,000 treatments at one center in Germany

“…Complications and problems accessing veins were 10e20 times more likely to occur in centers with less apheresis experience than in High Volume Centers. The high safety standard of lipoprotein apheresis is pointed out when comparing our results to the International Apheresis Registry, which reported side effects or complications in 20.4% of 6787 apheresis procedures performed on 1735 patients [38]. However, comparability is limited as in this registry a wide variety of apheresis methods and indications were pooled.…”

Membrane versus centrifuge-based therapeutic plasma exchange: a randomized prospective crossover study

“…While mTPE is preferred by nephrology departments as a management option in the treatment of autoimmune-related renal diseases such as microangiopathic hemolytic anemias, cTPE is preferentially used in transfusion medicine for a variety of diseases in the field of nephrology, neurology and hematology. According to the 2007 International Apheresis Registry, surveys of apheresis have shown geographical differences of clinical practice and the type of technologies used [7]. Plasma treatment by membrane filtration is preferred both in Germany and Japan.…”