Comparison of Two Filter Combinations for Low-Density Lipoprotein Apheresis by Membrane Differential Filtration: A Prospective Crossover Controlled Clinical Study
: Membrane differential filtration is an accepted procedure for the extracorporeal removal of low‐density lipoprotein (LDL). Reduction rates largely depend on the nature of the membranes and are ideally evaluated in a crossover study design. Four patients who had been treated by LDL apheresis for at...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Artificial organs 2002-04, Vol.26 (4), p.371-377 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 377 |
---|---|
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 371 |
container_title | Artificial organs |
container_volume | 26 |
creator | Matic, Goran Kohlschein, Peter Wallstab, Uwe Tiess, Michael Winkler, Roland Prophet, Heinrich Ramlow, Wolfgang Schuff-Werner, Peter |
description | : Membrane differential filtration is an accepted procedure for the extracorporeal removal of low‐density lipoprotein (LDL). Reduction rates largely depend on the nature of the membranes and are ideally evaluated in a crossover study design. Four patients who had been treated by LDL apheresis for at least 6 months were included. Six consecutive weekly sessions (40 ml plasma/kg body weight) were scheduled per system (Plasmacure PS06/Evaflux Eval 5A [Kuraray] versus Plasmaflo OP05W/Cascadeflo AC1770 [Asahi]). Laboratory measurements indicated reductions of plasma concentrations for fibrinogen (37%[Kuraray] versus 44%[Asahi]), IgG (15% versus 20%), IgA (24% versus 28%), IgM (63% versus 53%), and total protein (11% versus 16%). Total cholesterol was eliminated by 52% versus 49%, LDL by 67% versus 66%, triglycerides by 56% versus 41%, and high‐density lipoprotein by 10% versus 20%. Three therapies employing the Asahi filter combination were terminated prematurely due to saturation of the plasma fractionator. In conclusion, despite similar physical properties, the membranes differ significantly concerning selectivity and sensitivity to saturation. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1046/j.1525-1594.2002.06846.x |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_71590866</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>71590866</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4036-ed3f318d481eed96cd79c419498367684dd898da601def035040422fbc12e1c73</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkc1u1DAUhS1ERaeFV0BesUuwE8dJkFiMMvRHpBRBKeysJL4RHpI4tT2dyev0SXFmRmXLyle-55zr6w8hTElICePv1yFNoiSgSc7CiJAoJDxjPNy9QIvnxku0IJSTIOHs1yk6s3ZNCEkZ4a_QKaW5l5F8gZ4K3Y-VUVYPWLf4bqvxheocGOwbtRoqp_RgcasNLvU2WMFglZtwqUY9Gu1ADXg5_gYDVllcT_gG-tpUA-CValt_PThVdftIs4_6gJf4q9F2hMapR8CFr61-3M8bnNFdBxIXnRpU433f3UZOr9FJW3UW3hzPc_Tj4tNdcRWUt5fXxbIMGkZiHoCM25hmkmUUQOa8kWneMJqzPIt56v9HyizPZMUJldCSOCGMsChq64ZGQJs0PkfvDrl-sYcNWCd6ZRvoOr-O3liR-l8lGedemB2Ezfx4A60YjeorMwlKxMxHrMWMQcwYxMxH7PmInbe-Pc7Y1D3If8YjEC_4eBBsVQfTfweL5e23ufL-4OBX1sHu2V-ZP4KncZqIn18uRVp8vl8VWSnu478o_bEs</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>71590866</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of Two Filter Combinations for Low-Density Lipoprotein Apheresis by Membrane Differential Filtration: A Prospective Crossover Controlled Clinical Study</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Journals</source><creator>Matic, Goran ; Kohlschein, Peter ; Wallstab, Uwe ; Tiess, Michael ; Winkler, Roland ; Prophet, Heinrich ; Ramlow, Wolfgang ; Schuff-Werner, Peter</creator><creatorcontrib>Matic, Goran ; Kohlschein, Peter ; Wallstab, Uwe ; Tiess, Michael ; Winkler, Roland ; Prophet, Heinrich ; Ramlow, Wolfgang ; Schuff-Werner, Peter</creatorcontrib><description>: Membrane differential filtration is an accepted procedure for the extracorporeal removal of low‐density lipoprotein (LDL). Reduction rates largely depend on the nature of the membranes and are ideally evaluated in a crossover study design. Four patients who had been treated by LDL apheresis for at least 6 months were included. Six consecutive weekly sessions (40 ml plasma/kg body weight) were scheduled per system (Plasmacure PS06/Evaflux Eval 5A [Kuraray] versus Plasmaflo OP05W/Cascadeflo AC1770 [Asahi]). Laboratory measurements indicated reductions of plasma concentrations for fibrinogen (37%[Kuraray] versus 44%[Asahi]), IgG (15% versus 20%), IgA (24% versus 28%), IgM (63% versus 53%), and total protein (11% versus 16%). Total cholesterol was eliminated by 52% versus 49%, LDL by 67% versus 66%, triglycerides by 56% versus 41%, and high‐density lipoprotein by 10% versus 20%. Three therapies employing the Asahi filter combination were terminated prematurely due to saturation of the plasma fractionator. In conclusion, despite similar physical properties, the membranes differ significantly concerning selectivity and sensitivity to saturation.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0160-564X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1525-1594</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1046/j.1525-1594.2002.06846.x</identifier><identifier>PMID: 11952509</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Boston, MA, USA: Blackwell Science Inc</publisher><subject>Aged ; Cascade filtration ; Cholesterol, LDL ; Cross-Over Studies ; Double filtration ; Elimination plasmapheresis ; Filtration ; Humans ; Hypercholesterolemia ; Low-density lipoprotein ; Male ; Membranes, Artificial ; Middle Aged ; Plasmapheresis - methods ; Prospective Studies</subject><ispartof>Artificial organs, 2002-04, Vol.26 (4), p.371-377</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4036-ed3f318d481eed96cd79c419498367684dd898da601def035040422fbc12e1c73</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4036-ed3f318d481eed96cd79c419498367684dd898da601def035040422fbc12e1c73</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1046%2Fj.1525-1594.2002.06846.x$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1046%2Fj.1525-1594.2002.06846.x$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,27924,27925,45574,45575</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11952509$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Matic, Goran</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kohlschein, Peter</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wallstab, Uwe</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tiess, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Winkler, Roland</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Prophet, Heinrich</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ramlow, Wolfgang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schuff-Werner, Peter</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of Two Filter Combinations for Low-Density Lipoprotein Apheresis by Membrane Differential Filtration: A Prospective Crossover Controlled Clinical Study</title><title>Artificial organs</title><addtitle>Artificial Organs</addtitle><description>: Membrane differential filtration is an accepted procedure for the extracorporeal removal of low‐density lipoprotein (LDL). Reduction rates largely depend on the nature of the membranes and are ideally evaluated in a crossover study design. Four patients who had been treated by LDL apheresis for at least 6 months were included. Six consecutive weekly sessions (40 ml plasma/kg body weight) were scheduled per system (Plasmacure PS06/Evaflux Eval 5A [Kuraray] versus Plasmaflo OP05W/Cascadeflo AC1770 [Asahi]). Laboratory measurements indicated reductions of plasma concentrations for fibrinogen (37%[Kuraray] versus 44%[Asahi]), IgG (15% versus 20%), IgA (24% versus 28%), IgM (63% versus 53%), and total protein (11% versus 16%). Total cholesterol was eliminated by 52% versus 49%, LDL by 67% versus 66%, triglycerides by 56% versus 41%, and high‐density lipoprotein by 10% versus 20%. Three therapies employing the Asahi filter combination were terminated prematurely due to saturation of the plasma fractionator. In conclusion, despite similar physical properties, the membranes differ significantly concerning selectivity and sensitivity to saturation.</description><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Cascade filtration</subject><subject>Cholesterol, LDL</subject><subject>Cross-Over Studies</subject><subject>Double filtration</subject><subject>Elimination plasmapheresis</subject><subject>Filtration</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Hypercholesterolemia</subject><subject>Low-density lipoprotein</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Membranes, Artificial</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Plasmapheresis - methods</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><issn>0160-564X</issn><issn>1525-1594</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2002</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkc1u1DAUhS1ERaeFV0BesUuwE8dJkFiMMvRHpBRBKeysJL4RHpI4tT2dyev0SXFmRmXLyle-55zr6w8hTElICePv1yFNoiSgSc7CiJAoJDxjPNy9QIvnxku0IJSTIOHs1yk6s3ZNCEkZ4a_QKaW5l5F8gZ4K3Y-VUVYPWLf4bqvxheocGOwbtRoqp_RgcasNLvU2WMFglZtwqUY9Gu1ADXg5_gYDVllcT_gG-tpUA-CValt_PThVdftIs4_6gJf4q9F2hMapR8CFr61-3M8bnNFdBxIXnRpU433f3UZOr9FJW3UW3hzPc_Tj4tNdcRWUt5fXxbIMGkZiHoCM25hmkmUUQOa8kWneMJqzPIt56v9HyizPZMUJldCSOCGMsChq64ZGQJs0PkfvDrl-sYcNWCd6ZRvoOr-O3liR-l8lGedemB2Ezfx4A60YjeorMwlKxMxHrMWMQcwYxMxH7PmInbe-Pc7Y1D3If8YjEC_4eBBsVQfTfweL5e23ufL-4OBX1sHu2V-ZP4KncZqIn18uRVp8vl8VWSnu478o_bEs</recordid><startdate>200204</startdate><enddate>200204</enddate><creator>Matic, Goran</creator><creator>Kohlschein, Peter</creator><creator>Wallstab, Uwe</creator><creator>Tiess, Michael</creator><creator>Winkler, Roland</creator><creator>Prophet, Heinrich</creator><creator>Ramlow, Wolfgang</creator><creator>Schuff-Werner, Peter</creator><general>Blackwell Science Inc</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200204</creationdate><title>Comparison of Two Filter Combinations for Low-Density Lipoprotein Apheresis by Membrane Differential Filtration: A Prospective Crossover Controlled Clinical Study</title><author>Matic, Goran ; Kohlschein, Peter ; Wallstab, Uwe ; Tiess, Michael ; Winkler, Roland ; Prophet, Heinrich ; Ramlow, Wolfgang ; Schuff-Werner, Peter</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4036-ed3f318d481eed96cd79c419498367684dd898da601def035040422fbc12e1c73</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2002</creationdate><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Cascade filtration</topic><topic>Cholesterol, LDL</topic><topic>Cross-Over Studies</topic><topic>Double filtration</topic><topic>Elimination plasmapheresis</topic><topic>Filtration</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Hypercholesterolemia</topic><topic>Low-density lipoprotein</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Membranes, Artificial</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Plasmapheresis - methods</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Matic, Goran</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kohlschein, Peter</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wallstab, Uwe</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tiess, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Winkler, Roland</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Prophet, Heinrich</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ramlow, Wolfgang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schuff-Werner, Peter</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Artificial organs</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Matic, Goran</au><au>Kohlschein, Peter</au><au>Wallstab, Uwe</au><au>Tiess, Michael</au><au>Winkler, Roland</au><au>Prophet, Heinrich</au><au>Ramlow, Wolfgang</au><au>Schuff-Werner, Peter</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of Two Filter Combinations for Low-Density Lipoprotein Apheresis by Membrane Differential Filtration: A Prospective Crossover Controlled Clinical Study</atitle><jtitle>Artificial organs</jtitle><addtitle>Artificial Organs</addtitle><date>2002-04</date><risdate>2002</risdate><volume>26</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>371</spage><epage>377</epage><pages>371-377</pages><issn>0160-564X</issn><eissn>1525-1594</eissn><abstract>: Membrane differential filtration is an accepted procedure for the extracorporeal removal of low‐density lipoprotein (LDL). Reduction rates largely depend on the nature of the membranes and are ideally evaluated in a crossover study design. Four patients who had been treated by LDL apheresis for at least 6 months were included. Six consecutive weekly sessions (40 ml plasma/kg body weight) were scheduled per system (Plasmacure PS06/Evaflux Eval 5A [Kuraray] versus Plasmaflo OP05W/Cascadeflo AC1770 [Asahi]). Laboratory measurements indicated reductions of plasma concentrations for fibrinogen (37%[Kuraray] versus 44%[Asahi]), IgG (15% versus 20%), IgA (24% versus 28%), IgM (63% versus 53%), and total protein (11% versus 16%). Total cholesterol was eliminated by 52% versus 49%, LDL by 67% versus 66%, triglycerides by 56% versus 41%, and high‐density lipoprotein by 10% versus 20%. Three therapies employing the Asahi filter combination were terminated prematurely due to saturation of the plasma fractionator. In conclusion, despite similar physical properties, the membranes differ significantly concerning selectivity and sensitivity to saturation.</abstract><cop>Boston, MA, USA</cop><pub>Blackwell Science Inc</pub><pmid>11952509</pmid><doi>10.1046/j.1525-1594.2002.06846.x</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0160-564X |
ispartof | Artificial organs, 2002-04, Vol.26 (4), p.371-377 |
issn | 0160-564X 1525-1594 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_71590866 |
source | MEDLINE; Wiley Journals |
subjects | Aged Cascade filtration Cholesterol, LDL Cross-Over Studies Double filtration Elimination plasmapheresis Filtration Humans Hypercholesterolemia Low-density lipoprotein Male Membranes, Artificial Middle Aged Plasmapheresis - methods Prospective Studies |
title | Comparison of Two Filter Combinations for Low-Density Lipoprotein Apheresis by Membrane Differential Filtration: A Prospective Crossover Controlled Clinical Study |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-28T23%3A32%3A26IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20Two%20Filter%20Combinations%20for%20Low-Density%20Lipoprotein%20Apheresis%20by%20Membrane%20Differential%20Filtration:%20A%20Prospective%20Crossover%20Controlled%20Clinical%20Study&rft.jtitle=Artificial%20organs&rft.au=Matic,%20Goran&rft.date=2002-04&rft.volume=26&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=371&rft.epage=377&rft.pages=371-377&rft.issn=0160-564X&rft.eissn=1525-1594&rft_id=info:doi/10.1046/j.1525-1594.2002.06846.x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E71590866%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=71590866&rft_id=info:pmid/11952509&rfr_iscdi=true |