Effects of operating conditions on selectivity of a plasma fractionator in double filtration plasmapheresis

Plasmapheresis for systemic vasculitis

Systemic vasculitides include a variety of, and numerous diseases. In 2012, the International CHAPEL HILL Consensus Conference (CHCC2012) led to a major reorganization of the classification of vasculitis, and this is still in wide use today. Although the results of plasmapheresis for individual diseases have been sometimes shown, there are few systematic reviews that discuss the effects along with vasculitis classification. Therefore, we will discuss the efficacy and the latest evidence for each vasculitis according to the CHCC 2012 classification in this review. This review provides a comprehensive overview of the estimation of plasmapheresis in each of the vasculitides, with a particular focus on small vasculitides, which have recently discussed frequently. For some time now, plasma exchange therapy (PEX) has been frequently used and is expected to be effective in some diseases, most of which are included in small vessel vasculitides. In particular, data showing efficacy have been accumulated for immune complex vasculitis, and the recommendation seems to be high. For instance, anti‐GBM nephritis, concomitant use of PEX is essential and strongly recommended. On the other hand, for ANCA‐related vasculitis among small vessel vasculitis, RCTs have recently shown negative results. In particular, the PEXIVAS trial statistically showed that PEX has no potential to reduce the mortality and renal death in AAV, but the ASFA, ACR, and KDIGO guidelines following this trial all regard PEX as salvage therapy or selective treatment for severe cases. As plasmapheresis is often performed in combination with other therapies, it is difficult to evaluate to clarify its efficacy on its own, and this predisposition may be pronounced in vasculitis, a rare disease. Although statistically significant differences are not apparent, the diseases that show a trend toward efficacy may possibly include treatment‐sensitive subgroups. Further analysis is expected in the future.