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...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Artificial organs 2002-04, Vol.26 (4), p.371-377
Hauptverfasser: Matic, Goran, Kohlschein, Peter, Wallstab, Uwe, Tiess, Michael, Winkler, Roland, Prophet, Heinrich, Ramlow, Wolfgang, Schuff-Werner, Peter
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