Comparison of centrifugal-membrane hybrid plasmapheresis and centrifugation therapeutic plasma exchange in hyperlipidemia
10.13303/j.cjbt.issn.1004-549x.2024.12.004
- VernacularTitle:离心-膜杂合式血浆置换和离心式治疗性血浆置换在高脂血症中的应用对比
- Author:
Bin ZHANG
1
;
Chunxi WU
1
;
Yumeng ZHOU
1
;
Fang ZHOU
2
;
Zhongmei YI
1
Author Information
1. Department of Blood Transfusion, Southwest Hospital, Third Military Medical University (Army Medical University), Chongqing 400030, China
2. Department of Blood Transfusion, Army 73rd Group Army Hospital, Xiamen 361000, China
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
centrifugal-membrane hybrid plasmapheresis (CMHP);
therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE);
centrifugation;
hyperlipidemia
- From:
Chinese Journal of Blood Transfusion
2024;37(12):1365-1370
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
[Abstract] [Objective] To establish a new centrifugal-membrane hybrid plasmapheresis (CMHP) model, and observe its clinical efficacy, safety and advantages in the treatment of hyperlipidemia by comparing with centrifugation therapeutic plasma exchange (cTPE). [Methods] A retrospective analysis was performed on 47 patients with hyperlipidemia treated in our department from August 2021 to September 2023, with a total of 60 treatments. They were divided into two groups: CMHP group with 37 patients and 46 treatments; cTPE group included 10 patients with 14 treatments. In the CMHP group, the plasma was separated by a blood cell separator and the plasma components were separated by a two-stage membrane plasma component separator. In the cTPE group, the plasma was separated by a blood cell separator for therapeutic plasma exchange. The clinical efficacy, safety and advantages of the two groups were compared. [Results] The reduction ratios of total cholesterol (TC), triglyceride (TG), high density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) and low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) before and after treatment in CMHP group were 68.56%[59.81%, 73.42%], 65.80%[55.55%, 75.98%] and 46.57%[36.02%, 54.83%] and 66.67%[43.48%, 76.24%] respectively, with statistically significant difference (P<0.001). The decrease ratios of TC, TG and HDL-C before and after treatment in cTPE group were 42.52%[29.67%, 49.85%], 52.32%[38.43%, 67.07%] and 22.36%[8.51%, 33.65%], respectively, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). The plasma treatment multiple was 1.48 (0.29) in CMHP group, which was significantly higher than 0.87 (0.26) in cTPE group, with a statistically significant difference (P<0.001), resulting in higher TC and HDL-C reduction ratios in CMHP group than in cTPE group, with a statistically significant difference (P<0.001), while there was no significant difference in TG reduction rate between the two groups (P>0.05). At the same time, the cTPE group required 1 520.00 mL[1 462.50 mL, 2 000.00 mL] plasma input, while the CMHP group achieved zero blood input. The adverse reaction ratio was 6.52%(3/46) in CMHP group and 7.14%(1/14) in cTPE group, and the difference was not statistically significant (P>0.05). [Conclusion] Compared with cTPE, CMHP can better reduce blood lipid levels without any blood products, avoid the spread of blood infectious diseases, and have a low incidence of adverse reactions, so it has a good clinical application prospect.
