Influence of therapeutic plasma exchange treatment on short-term mortality of critically ill adult patients with sepsis-induced organ dysfunction: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The impact of therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) on short-term mortality in adult patients with sepsis-induced organ dysfunction remains uncertain. The objective of the study is to assess the effect of adjunct TPE in this setting through a comprehensive literature review. METHODS: The National Library of Medicine's Medline, Ovid (Embase), the Cochrane Library database and clinicaltrial.gov from January 01, 1966, until October 01, 2022, were searched for terms: therapeutic plasma exchange, plasmapheresis, sepsis, and septic shock. We reviewed, selected and extracted data from relevant randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and matched cohort studies (MCSs) comparing short-term mortality in critically ill adult septic patients treated with standard therapy versus those receiving adjunct TPE. Risk of bias was assessed in the RCTs using Cochrane Collaboration tool and in MCSs using ROBINS-I tool. Summary statistics, risk ratios (RRs), and confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using random effects model. RESULTS: This systematic review included 937 adult critically ill septic patients from five RCTs (n = 367) and fifteen MCSs (n = 570). Of these total, 543 received treatment with TPE in addition to standard care. The meta-analysis includes all five RCTs and only six MCSs (n = 627). The adjunct TPE treatment (n = 300) showed a significant reduction in short-term mortality (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.47-0.74, I2 3%) compared to standard therapy alone (n = 327). The systematic review of all 20 trials revealed that adding TPE to the standard therapy of critically ill septic patients resulted in faster clinical and/or laboratory recovery. CONCLUSIONS: Our comprehensive and up-to-date review demonstrates that adjunct TPE may provide potential survival benefits when compared to standard care for critically ill adult patients with sepsis-induced organ dysfunction. While results of this meta-analysis are encouraging, large well-designed randomized trials are required to identify the optimal patient population and TPE procedure characteristics prior to widespread adoption into practice.

Therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) as a plausible rescue therapy in severe vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia.

Vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT) is associated with high titers of immunoglobulin G class antibodies directed against the cationic platelet chemokine platelet factor 4 (PF4). These antibodies activate platelets via FcγIIa receptors. VITT closely resembles heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. Inflammation and tissue trauma substantially increase the risk for forming pathogenic PF4 antibodies. We therefore propose the use of therapeutic plasma exchange as rescue therapy in VITT to deplete antibodies plus factors promoting inflammation such as excess cytokines in the circulation as well as extracellular vesicles derived from activated platelets.

How we treat thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura: Results of a Canadian TTP practice survey.

BACKGROUND: Thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (TTP) is a rare disease with 90% mortality if untreated. Since the Canadian Apheresis Group (CAG) trial showed greater survival with therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) versus plasma infusion, there has been widespread adoption of TPE. Beyond TPE, there is significant practice variation. To characterize this, we developed a survey sent to physicians who might be directly involved in TTP management. METHODS: The survey was sent to CAG members as well as hematologists and nephrologists nationwide and addressed areas of controversy or recognized practice heterogeneity. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize responses, and the χ2 test was used to compare respondents who were and were not CAG physicians. We also compared responses by estimated frequency of TTP cases per year. RESULTS: The CAG response rate was 31% (13 of 42). The survey was sent to 665 non-CAG physicians, of whom 41 responded (6.1%). Though not statistically different, CAG and non-CAG respondents varied regarding use of corticosteroids, aspirin, and venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis. Significant differences were found between CAG and non-CAG groups regarding cryosupernatant as fluid choice (69.2% vs. 22.5%, P = .004) and the use of TPE tapering (84.6% vs. 51.3%, P = .034), respectively. CONCLUSION: TTP treatment is variable across centres in Canada. Areas of significant variation include the choice of replacement fluid for TPE and whether or not and how to taper TPE. Our survey highlights the practice heterogeneity that exists and identifies areas where more evidence is needed and perhaps where trials should be performed.

A phase-II sequential case-series study of all patients presenting to four plasma exchange centres with presumed relapsed/refractory thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura treated with rituximab.

The primary objective of this phase II study was to evaluate the efficacy of rituximab in the management of adult patients with physician-diagnosed presumed thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (TTP); relapsed or refractory. We conducted a multicentre study in four Canadian hospital-based apheresis units. Forty patients with presumed TTP (20 refractory and 20 relapsing) were sequentially enrolled and all received rituximab in a standardized manner. A complete response was documented in 14 of 19 refractory patients by week 8 and 15/16 were alive and in remission at 52 weeks (one patient was lost to follow-up, one was a non-responder, and three died). Among relapsing patients, 16/18 had a complete response at week 8 and 18/18 at week 52 (one patient lost to follow-up and one withdrew). At 1 year, all relapsing and 85% of refractory patients survived. Of 38/40 patients who had ADMATS13 testing at study entry, 13/19 refractory and 10/19 relapsing patients had ADAMTS13 < 10% (typical TTP); whereas 6/19 refractory and 9/19 relapsing cases had ADAMTS13 > 10% (other thrombotic microangiopathy; TMA). Refractory-typical TTP in contrast to refractory-other TMA and all relapsing patients treated with plasma exchange and rituximab, were less likely to be responsive and more likely to die or relapse.

The efficacy and safety of plasma exchange in patients with sepsis and septic shock: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Sepsis and septic shock are leading causes of intensive care unit (ICU) mortality. They are characterized by excessive inflammation, upregulation of procoagulant proteins and depletion of natural anticoagulants. Plasma exchange has the potential to improve survival in sepsis by removing inflammatory cytokines and restoring deficient plasma proteins. The objective of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of plasma exchange in patients with sepsis. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, Scopus, reference lists of relevant articles, and grey literature for relevant citations. We included randomized controlled trials comparing plasma exchange or plasma filtration with usual care in critically ill patients with sepsis or septic shock. Two reviewers independently identified trials, extracted trial-level data and performed risk of bias assessments using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality reported at longest follow-up. Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model. RESULTS: Of 1,957 records identified, we included four unique trials enrolling a total of 194 patients (one enrolling adults only, two enrolling children only, one enrolling adults and children). The mean age of adult patients ranged from 38 to 53 years (n = 128) and the mean age of children ranged from 0.9 to 18 years (n = 66). All trials were at unclear to high risk of bias. The use of plasma exchange was not associated with a significant reduction in all-cause mortality (risk ratio (RR) 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.45 to 1.52, I(2) 60%). In adults, plasma exchange was associated with reduced mortality (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.96; I(2) 0%), but was not in children (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.28 to 3.38; I(2) 60%). None of the trials reported ICU or hospital lengths of stay. Only one trial reported adverse events associated with plasma exchange including six episodes of hypotension and one allergic reaction to fresh frozen plasma. CONCLUSIONS: Insufficient evidence exists to recommend plasma exchange as an adjunctive therapy for patients with sepsis or septic shock. Rigorous randomized controlled trials evaluating clinically relevant patient-centered outcomes are required to evaluate the impact of plasma exchange in this condition.

Patients' quality of life after stopping plasma exchange: a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Plasma exchange is being widely used to treat various serious medical conditions. There has been very little follow-up data to describe the quality of life (QOL) of plasma exchange-recipients after active plasma exchange has stopped. OBJECTIVE: To assess the QOL of plasma exchange recipients after stopping plasma exchange. METHODS: A pilot study, based on responses to a postal questionnaire and clinical data obtained from the patients' charts, was carried out. The scores were computed from questionnaire responses and analyzed. RESULTS: The response rate was 59% with 58 patients completing a questionnaire three months after their final plasma exchange therapy. We identified significant heterogeneity in the quality of life of plasma exchange recipients after stopping plasma exchange therapy. This could be driven by different patient co-morbidities. We recommend that during follow up visits, a multi-disciplinary approach including consultation with a social worker might be considered for patients who may continue to have some limitations in their psychosocial activities post-discontinuation of plasma exchange. The high response rate to the questionnaire indicates that PLEX patients are interested in being involved in QOL studies, which suggests potential support for a prospective study of QOL with pre and post questionnaires and more detailed tracking of baseline co-morbidities.