The choice of vascular access for therapeutic apheresis

Use of the Superficialized Brachial Artery as Vascular Access for a Patient with Myasthenia Gravis with a Frequent Need for Plasmapheresis

A 41-year-old woman diagnosed with seronegative myasthenia gravis struggled to maintain remission for a decade, facing crises every 3 months for several years. After repeated apheresis using a non-tunneled non-cuffed central venous dialysis catheter (NTNCC), complications such as catheter-related thrombus in the internal jugular veins and morbid obesity from steroids made the insertion of NTNCC increasingly difficult, leading to consideration of an alternative permanent vascular access (VA) approach. Thus, we created a subcutaneously superficialized brachial artery as the VA, which allowed the patient to undergo safe and uninterrupted apheresis therapy.

Delipid extracorporeal lipoprotein filter from plasma system: a new intensive lipid lowering therapy for patients with acute ischemic stroke

Objectives

To investigate the safety and efficacy of the delipid extracorporeal lipoprotein filter from plasma (DELP) system, a new low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) adsorption system, in acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients.

Patients and methods

In the present study, a total of 180 AIS patients were enrolled during March 2019 to February 2021. They were divided into DELP group (n1 = 90) and the control group (n2 = 90). The treatment protocol and vascular access of DELP treatment was established and evaluated. For the DELP group, clinical data and laboratory results including plasma lipid and safety parameters before and after the apheresis were collected and analyzed. For all participants, neurological scores were assessed and recorded.

Results

For the DELP group, 90 patients including 70 males and 20 females were included. The mean LDL-C was significantly decreased from 3.15 ± 0.80 mmol/L to 2.18 ± 0.63 mmol/L (30.79%, p < 0.001) during a single DELP treatment, and decreased from 3.42 ± 0.87 mmol/L to 1.87 ± 0.48 mmol/L (45.32%, p < 0.001) after two DELP treatments. No clinically relevant changes were observed in hematologic safety parameters and blood pressure levels except for hematocrit and total protein throughout the whole period of DELP treatment. The DELP group showed improvement relative to the control group in National Institute of Health stroke scale scores (NIHSS) on the 14th and 90th day after stroke. Moreover, the DELP group had a significantly higher ratio of mRS 0 to 1 on the 90th day after stroke.

Conclusion

The new LDL-C adsorption system, the DELP system, may provide a new option for intensive lipid lowering therapy in AIS patients in view of its safety, efficacy, and operation feasibility.

Vascular Access in Therapeutic Apheresis: One Size Does not Fit All

BACKGROUND

Therapeutic apheresis has been used in treating hematological and non-hematological diseases. For a successful procedure, efficient vascular access is required. Presently, peripheral venous access (PVA), central venous catheterization (CVC), implantable ports, and arteriovenous fistulas (AVFs) are used. This review aims to evaluate different type of access and their pros and cons to help physicians determine the best venous access.

METHODS

The electronic search included PubMed and Google Scholar up to Nov. 2020. The Mesh terms were apheresis, peripheral catheterization, central catheterization, and arteriovenous fistula.

RESULTS

A total of 228 studies were found through database searching. Two independent authors reviewed the articles using their titles and abstracts; 88 articles were selected and the full text was reviewed. Finally, 25 were included. The inclusion criteria were studies incorporating patients with any indication for apheresis.

CONCLUSION

PVA has been promoted in recent years in many centers across the United States to lower the rate of complications associated with vascular access and to make this procedure more accessible. Several factors are involved in selecting appropriate venous access, such as the procedure's duration and frequency, patient's vascular anatomy, and staff's experience. In short-term procedures, temporary vascular access like PVA or CVC is preferred. Permanent vascular access such as AVF, tunneled cuffed central lines, and implantable ports are more beneficial in prolonged treatment period but each patient has to be evaluated individually by apheresis team for the most appropriate method.

Is a 20 gauge fenestrated intravenous catheter non-inferior to a 18 gauge standard catheter for apheresis procedures? A pilot study

BACKGROUND

Peripheral venous access has been promoted as the safest, quickest, and most easily achievable route for performing apheresis procedures by the American Society for Apheresis' Choosing Wisely campaign. The current literature regarding catheter size and selection for both draw and return access is limited. Furthermore, the Infusion Nurses Society recommends using the smallest gauge catheter possible for the prescribed therapy in order to limit vein trauma and phlebitis. Since there is a lack of evidence to guide selection of catheter size for return access during therapeutic apheresis procedures (TAPs) for patients with chronic conditions, this pilot study seeks to compare the performance of a 20-gauge fenestrated (20G) catheter to a standard 18-gauge (18G) intravenous catheter.

METHODS

This non-inferiority pilot study randomized 26 subjects during 74 TAPs to either 20G fenestrated catheter or 18G standard catheter.

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant differences for variables associated with the efficiency of the TAPs comparing 20G to 18G catheter for inlet rate (P = .8666), return pressure (P = .9427), blood processed (P = .4318), or total procedure time (P = .3184).

CONCLUSION

The results from this pilot study suggest that 20G fenestrated catheter is non-inferior to 18G standard catheters. Additional studies with increased power are warranted to confirm these findings.

Use of granulocyte/monocytapheresis in ulcerative colitis: A practical review from a European perspective

Half of the patients with ulcerative colitis require at least one course of systemic corticosteroids in their lifetime. Approximately 75% of these patients will also require immunosuppressive drugs (i.e., thiopurines or biological agents) in the mid-term to avoid colectomy. Immunosuppressive drugs raise some concerns due to an increased risk of serious and opportunistic infections and cancer, particularly in elderly and co-morbid patients, underlining the unmet need for safer alternative therapies. Granulocyte/monocytapheresis (GMA), a CE-marked, non-pharmacological procedure for the treatment of ulcerative colitis (among other immune-mediated diseases), remains the only therapy targeting neutrophils, the hallmark of pathology in ulcerative colitis. GMA has proven its efficacy in different clinical scenarios and shows an excellent and unique safety profile. In spite of being a first line therapy in Japan, GMA use is still limited to a small number of centres and countries in Europe. In this article, we aim to give an overview from a European perspective of the mechanism of action, recent clinical data on efficacy and practical aspects for the use of GMA in ulcerative colitis.

Good practice statements (GPS) for the clinical care of patients with thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura

BACKGROUND

Despite advances in treatment options for thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (TTP), there are still limited high quality data to inform clinicians regarding its management.

METHODS

In June 2018, the ISTH formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel to issue recommendations about treatment of TTP. The panel discussed 12 treatment questions related to both immune-mediated TTP (iTTP) and hereditary/congenital TTP (cTTP). The panel used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, including evidence-to-decision frameworks, to appraise evidence and formulate recommendations.

RESULTS

The panel agreed on eleven recommendations based on evidence ranging from very low to moderate certainty. For first episode and relapses of acute iTTP, the panel made a strong recommendation for the addition of corticosteroids to therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE), and a conditional recommendation for addition of rituximab and caplacizumab. For asymptomatic iTTP with low ADAMTS13, the panel made a conditional recommendation for rituximab outside of pregnancy, and for prophylactic TPE during pregnancy. For asymptomatic cTTP, the panel made a strong recommendation for prophylactic plasma infusion during pregnancy, but a conditional recommendation for plasma infusion or a wait and watch approach outside of pregnancy.

CONCLUSIONS

The panel's recommendations are based on all the available evidence for the treatment effects of various approaches including suppressing inflammation, blocking platelet clumping, replacing the missing and/or inhibited ADAMTS13, and suppressing ADAMTS13 antibody production. There was insufficient evidence for further comparison of different treatment approaches, for which future high-quality studies in iTTP (e.g., rituximab, corticosteroids, recombinant ADAMTS13, and caplacizumab) and in cTTP (eg, recombinant ADAMTS13) are needed.

The practical integration of a hybrid model of ultrasound-guided peripheral venous access in a large apheresis center

BACKGROUND

Apheresis treatments require adequate venous access using peripheral intravenous (PIV) catheterization or central venous catheters (CVC). Ultrasound-guided PIV (USGPIV) can be used to decrease the need of CVC insertions for apheresis procedures.

METHOD

A hybrid model of USGPIV and standard of care (SOC) for PIV access was developed. Nurses performed USGPIV on all patients considered for PIV access if felt SOC PIV access was not possible. Information was collected regarding nurses' confidence with access, number of attempts required, site of access, complications, and need for CVC.

RESULTS

In all, 226 PIV access attempts were made during a 2-month period. All apheresis procedure types were represented. A total 65% were accessed by SOC and 35% by USGPIV. USGPIV was successful on first try on 90% draw/inlet access and 87% successful on first try on return access. Access above the antecubital fossa was required in 31% of USGPIV for draw/inlet veins, and 22% of return veins. Nurses' confidence with accessing PIV was increased by USGPIV, based on 7-point Likert scale assessments. During the recording period, 2/226 (0.9%) apheresis procedures required a CVC. In a separate cohort of only hematopoietic progenitor cell collections, CVC insertion was required in 44/238 (18.5%) patients, in 7 months prior to adoption of USGPIV and 5/152 (3.3%) patients in 7 months following adoption of USGPIV.

CONCLUSION

A hybrid model of using SOC and USGPIV for PIV access for apheresis procedures resulted in decreased need for CVC access, high levels of successful initial access attempts, and increased nursing confidence in PIV access.

Peripheral vascular access for therapeutic plasma exchange: A practical approach to increased utilization and selecting the most appropriate vascular access

BACKGROUND

Therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) is used in the treatment of many diseases. At present, peripheral vascular access (PVA) is an underutilized method of vascular access in TPE. It should be considered more frequently due its relatively low risk for adverse events, particularly infections.

METHODS

The Advancing Vascular Access in Apheresis Working Group met in December 2017 for an extensive review and discussion of vascular access for TPE and developed a "road map" providing detailed information regarding clinical situations in which PVA-based TPE would and would not be appropriate.

RESULTS

The road map is consistent with current recommendations that PVA should be used in combination with TPE whenever possible. PVA should be considered for patients who do not have existing central lines and who are stable. The patient should have peripheral veins that will allow for adequate treatment and must be able to comply with the process of achieving and maintaining peripheral access. There should be expert clinical assessment of veins, and this evaluation may include ultrasound and/or near infrared evaluation. Conditions that would prompt a switch from PVA to an alternate method of venous access include loss of venous access, patient preference, or development of a requirement for very frequent treatment over a long period of time.

CONCLUSIONS

While PVA is not suitable for all patients requiring TPE, it has significant safety advantages over other approaches and should be employed whenever possible.

Overcoming challenges of venous thromboembolism in sickle cell disease treatment

INTRODUCTION

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common comorbid condition found in sickle cell disease (SCD) and is associated with increased mortality for adults with SCD. The pathophysiology that leads to the thrombophilic state in SCD has been previously reviewed; however, evidence-based guidelines to aid in diagnosis, prevention, and management of VTE are lacking. Areas covered: This review article will cover the pathophysiology underlying the hypercoagulable state, the epidemiology of VTE, and management strategies of VTE in SCD. Expert opinion: Providers should have a high suspicion for diagnosing VTE to help reduce morbidity and mortality in the SCD population. Unlike other thrombophilias, the risk of life-threatening anemia while being treated with anticoagulation is compounded with the potential complications surrounding red blood cell transfusions in this population (i.e. alloimmunization, hyperhemolysis) and this provides another complexity to managing VTE in this population. Clinical trials evaluating the risk and benefit of treatment and treatment duration are needed.

Indwelling ports for prophylactic RBC exchanges in sickle cell patients: Comparison of bard and vortex ports

INTRODUCTION

Red blood cell exchange (RCE) procedures are commonly used for stroke prevention in sickle cell disease (SCD) patients. We compared two different dual lumen ports used for RCE because differences between the port and catheter design may lead to functional variance.

METHODS

We reviewed the RCE parameters of SCD patients following implantable port placement encountered at a single institution. Five Vortex and four Bard ports were used and compared. Patients were followed for 1-24 exchange procedures over 3-26 months performed between 2013 and 2015.

RESULTS

Nine patients underwent 124 RCE procedures with no failures. A total of 74 exchanges used Vortex ports with a mean flow rate of 45.2 mL/min while 50 exchanges used Bard ports with a mean flow rate of 42.1 mL/min which was a significant difference (P = .002). A total of 85 exchanges with tPA administration preprocedure had a mean flow rate of 43.8 mL/min while 39 exchanges without had a mean flow rate of 45.4 mL/min which was not a significant difference (P = .19).

CONCLUSION

Both the Bard and Vortex ports functioned well during our study period with no treatment failures, no significant complications requiring removal or replacement, and adequate mean flow rates. While the difference in mean flow rates was statistically significant between Vortex and Bard ports, there may not be a practical difference in performance. There also does not appear to be a significant benefit in flow rates with preprocedure tPA. We conclude that both ports may be a satisfactory choice for vascular access in SCD patients expected to undergo regularly scheduled RCE.

Vascular access for therapeutic plasma exchange

Therapeutic plasma exchange is an apheresis modality in which plasma is separated from the blood cellular components ex vivo, discarded, and replaced with an isosmotic fluid (most commonly 5% albumin) to maintain appropriate oncotic pressure in the patient. Therapeutic plasma exchange is used in the treatment of many diseases and indications. The recent seventh edition of the American Society for Apheresis guidelines indicates approximately 72 diseases and 116 indications for which therapeutic plasma exchange may be effective. One of the critical aspects for the successful performance of therapeutic plasma exchange is appropriate vascular access to provide high blood flow for the collection and return phases of the procedure, especially because most patients who need therapeutic plasma exchange will require more than one treatment over days to weeks. This article provides an overview of the characteristics of therapeutic plasma exchange, the clinical diseases and indications that may be treated with therapeutic plasma exchange, and the different types of vascular access employed, with their advantages and disadvantages. The latter may include peripheral venous access and intravascular or implantable access devices, such as arteriovenous grafts and fistulas, central venous catheters, and central venous catheters tunneled with ports.

Vascular access considerations for extracorporeal photopheresis

Extracorporeal photopheresis is an immunomodulatory therapy indicated for patients with cutaneous T-cell lymphoma, graft-versus-host disease, and heart or lung allograft rejection. Whole blood from the patient is drawn into the photopheresis instrument where it is separated into its components. Plasma, red blood cells, and the treated buffy coat are subsequently returned to the patient. Consistent, adequate blood flow is necessary to successfully complete the procedure. Vascular access options for photopheresis include peripheral vein cannulation, tunneled central venous catheters, and subcutaneous ports. Photopheresis is a very safe procedure; however, the complications and impact on the patient's quality of life associated with vascular access devices can be significant.

Long-term lipoprotein apheresis in the treatment of severe familial hypercholesterolemia refractory to high intensity statin therapy: Three year experience at a lipoprotein apheresis centre

BACKGROUND

Severe familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) individuals, refractory to conventional lipidlowering medications are at exceptionally high risk of cardiovascular events. The established therapeutic option of last choice is lipoprotein apheresis (LA). Herein, it was sought to investigate the clinical usefulness of LA in a highly selected group of severe heterozygous FH (HeFH), as recently described by the International Atherosclerosis Society (IAS), for their efficacy in lipid reduction and safety.

METHODS

Efficacy and safety of LA were investigated in 318 sessions of 7 severe HeFH females with cardiovascular disease, over a mean period of 26.9 ± 6.5 months. Relative reduction of low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) ≥ 60%, clinical complications and vascular access problems were evaluated and compared between the direct adsorption of lipoproteins (DALI) and lipoprotein filtration (Membrane Filtration Optimized Novel Extracorporeal Treatment [MONET]). Additionally, lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)], total cholesterol (TC), high density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), triglycerides (TG) and fibrinogen concentrations were investigated.

RESULTS

The relative reduction of LDL-C, TC, TG and Lp(a) were 69.4 ± 12.9%, 59.7 ± 9.1, 51.5 ± ± 14.2% and 71.3 ± 14.4%, respectively. A similar efficacy was found in both systems in LDL-C removal. DALI system led to larger depletions of Lp(a) (80.0 [76-83]% vs. 73.0 [64.7-78.8]%; p < 0.001). The frequency of clinical side effects and vascular access problems were low (8.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term LA in severe HeFH individuals is safe and efficiently reduces LDL-C and Lp(a). Higher efficacy of the DALI system than MONET in Lp(a) removal may indicate the need for individualized application of the LA system in severe HeFH individuals.

Vascular access in lipoprotein apheresis: a retrospective analysis from the UK's largest lipoprotein apheresis centre

INTRODUCTION

Lipoprotein apheresis (LA) has proven to be an effective, safe and life-saving therapy. Vascular access is needed to facilitate this treatment but has recognised complications. Despite consistency in treatment indication and duration there are no guidelines in place. The aim of this study is to characterise vascular access practice at the UK's largest LA centre and forward suggestions for future approaches.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of vascular access strategies was undertaken in all patients who received LA treatment in the low-density lipoprotein (LDL) Apheresis Unit at Harefield Hospital (Middlesex, UK) from November 2000 to March 2016.

RESULTS

Fifty-three former and current patients underwent 4260 LA treatments. Peripheral vein cannulation represented 79% of initial vascular access strategies with arteriovenous (AV) fistula use accounting for 15%. Last used method of vascular access was peripheral vein cannulation in 57% versus AV fistula in 32%. Total AV fistula failure rate was 37%.

CONCLUSIONS

Peripheral vein cannulation remains the most common method to facilitate LA. Practice trends indicate a move towards AV fistula creation; the favoured approach receiving support from the expert body in this area. AV fistula failure rate is high and of great concern, therefore we suggest the implementation of upper limb ultrasound vascular mapping in all patients who meet treatment eligibility criteria. We encourage close ties between apheresis units and specialist surgical centres to facilitate patient counselling and monitoring. Further prospective data regarding fistula failure is needed in this expanding treatment field.