Cardiovascular Outcome of Pediatric Patients With Bi-Allelic (Homozygous) Familial Hypercholesterolemia Before and After Initiation of Multimodal Lipid Lowering Therapy Including Lipoprotein Apheresis.

Twenty-four patients with bi-allelic familial hypercholesterolemia commencing chronic lipoprotein apheresis (LA) at a mean age of 8.5 ± 3.1 years were analysed retrospectively and in part prospectively with a mean follow-up of 17.2 ± 5.6 years. Mean age at diagnosis was 6.3 ± 3.4 years. Untreated mean LDL-C concentrations were 752 mg/dl ± 193 mg/dl (19.5 mmol/l ± 5.0 mmol/l). Multimodal lipid lowering therapy including LA resulted in a mean LDL-C concentration of 184 mg/dl (4.8 mmol/l), which represents a 75.5% mean reduction. Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9-antibodies contributed in 3 patients to LDL-C lowering with 5 patients remaining to be tested. After commencing chronic LA, 16 patients (67%) remained clinically stable with only subclinical findings of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), and neither cardiovascular events, nor need for vascular interventions or surgery. In 19 patients (79%), pathologic findings were detected at the aortic valve (AV), which in the majority were mild. AV replacement was required in 2 patients. Mean Lipoprotein(a) concentration was 42.4 mg/dl, 38% had >50 mg/dl. There was no overt correlation of AV pathologies with other ASCVD complications, or Lipoprotein(a) concentration. Physicochemical elimination of LDL particles by LA appears indispensable for patients with bi-allelic familial hypercholesterolemia and severe hypercholesterolemia to maximize the reduction of LDL-C. In conclusion, in this rare patient group regular assessment of both the AV, as well as all arteries accessible by ultrasound should be performed to adjust the intensity of multimodal lipid lowering therapy with the goal to prevent ASCVD events and aortic surgery.

Homozygous familial hypercholesterolemia with severe involvement of the aortic valve-A sibling-controlled case study on the efficacy of lipoprotein apheresis.

BACKGROUND: Homozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (hoFH) can cause severe atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) in early infancy. Diagnosis and initiation of effective lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) are recommended as early as possible to prevent ASCVD-related morbidity and mortality. METHODS: The clinical courses of a pair of siblings with an identical hoFH genotype, who exhibited major similarities of their clinical phenotype were analyzed in a case-control fashion including the family. RESULTS: The older sibling was diagnosed with hoFH at the age of 4. Untreated LDL-cholesterol (LDL-C) was 17 mmol/L (660 mg/dL). LLT including lipoprotein apheresis (LA) was initiated and has been successful for 8 years now. A reduction of estimated cholesterol burden by 74% was achieved by LA and combined drug therapy including statins and ezetimibe. The efficacy of escalation of drug therapy was limited because the underlying LDL receptor (LDLR) mutation in the family resulted in substantially reduced receptor function. Treatment with proprotein convertase subtilisin-kexin type 9 (PCSK9)-antibodies failed. His younger brother died at the age of 2 years shortly after the hoFH diagnosis of the elder sibling. Postmortem examination revealed advanced aortic root atheroma and aortic valve stenosis. In the older sibling, aortic valve stenosis and insufficiency were treated at the age of 9 years with mechanical aortic valve replacement. CONCLUSIONS: LLT including LA should be initiated as early as possible following the diagnosis of hoFH with very high LDL-C levels. With the same genotype, the phenotype of hoFH can exhibit similar patterns but outcome is substantially related to treatment.

Lipoprotein(a) - Marker for cardiovascular risk and target for lipoprotein apheresis.

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) consists of an LDL particle whose apolipoprotein B (apoB) is covalently bound to apolipoprotein(a) (apo[a]). An increased Lp(a) concentration is a causal, independent risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and a predictor of incident or recurrent cardiovascular events. Although Lp(a) was first described as early as 1963, only the more recent results of epidemiological, molecular, and genetic studies have led to this unequivocal conclusion. More than 20% of Western populations have elevated Lp(a) values. Lp(a) concentrations should be always part of the lipid profile when ASCVD risk is assessed. However, presence of other risk factors, laboratory findings, medical history and family history must be considered to conclude on its clinical relevance in an individual patient. Early or progressive ASCVD or a familial predisposition are key findings which can be associated with elevated Lp(a). The cholesterol portion contained in Lp(a) is also included in the various methods of LDL-C measurement. To assess proximity to the cardiovascular risk related target value for LDL-C, appropriate correction should be applied when high Lp(a) values are obtained to estimate the LDL-C that can actually be treated by lipid lowering drugs. Initial study data show that antisense oligonucleotides, which selectively decrease apolipoprotein(a), are promising as future treatment options. Currently, lipoprotein apheresis, which has a reimbursement guideline in Germany, is the therapy of choice for patients with Lp(a)-associated progressive ASCVD, with the aim of sustained prevention of further cardiovascular events.

Lipoprotein(a) and mortality-a high risk relationship.

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is an independent cardiovascular risk factor playing a causal role for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Early or progressive ASCVD or a familial predisposition are key findings which can be associated with Lp(a)-hyperlipoproteinemia (Lp(a)-HLP). The German guideline for the indication of lipoprotein apheresis in patients with Lp(a)-HLP has proved to be of value to identify patients at highest risk, using the composite of a Lp(a) threshold >60 mg/dl (>120 nmol/l) and clinical ASCVD progression despite effective LDL-C lowering therapy. In particular for such patients it appears to be plausible that Lp(a)-associated risk would increase cardiovascular mortality as the most important part of total mortality in Western populations. By the majority of existing investigations an association of Lp(a) concentration on total or cardiovascular mortality was demonstrated. However, inconsistency in the findings between studies exists without a clear trend for any study feature to explain this. Genetic homogeneity of the population, long-term follow-up, and clinically guided selection of patients might be important to further clarify the impact of Lp(a) concentration on progression of ASCVD, and finally total or cardiovascular mortality. LDL and Lp(a) particles exhibit a mutual effect modification on related ASCVD risk. Therefore, LDL-C levels and concomitant LDL-C lowering treatment must be considered in this context. Prospective evaluation is needed to document that specific Lp(a)-lowering additional to targeted LDL-C lowering will in fact reduce cardiovascular or total mortality.

Real-world study: Escalating targeted lipid-lowering treatment with PCSK9-inhibitors and lipoprotein apheresis.

INTRODUCTION: Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibition with monoclonal antibodies has complemented the armamentarium of lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) before the final step of commencing chronic lipoprotein apheresis (LA). Data are scarce on patients who, after escalation of LLT with PCSK9 antibodies, have commenced chronic LA or PCSK9 antibody treatment during ongoing long-term LA. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this study, a cohort of 110 patients with established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) due to hypercholesterolemia or concomitant lipoprotein(a)-hyperlipoproteinemia, who received PCSK9 antibodies for the first time during routine care, were consecutively identified. RESULTS: Mean LDL-C concentration prior to initiation of LA or PCSK9 antibody treatment was 5.3 ± 2.6 mmol/L (205 ± 102 mg/dL). Due to established ASCVD, the risk-adjusted LDL-C target value was <1.8 mmol/L (<70 mg/dL) in all patients. Use of PCSK9 antibodies increased the proportion of patients attaining the LDL-C target concentration by 41.8% overall. Treatment emergent adverse events (TEAE) associated with PCSK9 antibody medication were reported in 35 patients (31.8%). Discontinuation of PCSK9 antibody therapy due to TEAEs occurred in 25 patients (22.7%). CONCLUSION: Finally, 55.5% of patients received a combination of PCSK9 antibody therapy and LA at individually optimized treatment frequencies resulting in an increase of target attainment in 54.1% of patients. About 18.1% of chronic LA patients terminated LA treatment in this real-world study. The termination of long-term LA therapy, which has hitherto prevented the progression of ASCVD, requires careful individual risk assessment and cannot be recommended by the general criteria of LDL-C reduction.

Multimodal lipid-lowering treatment in pediatric patients with homozygous familial hypercholesterolemia-target attainment requires further increase of intensity.

BACKGROUND: Familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) causes premature cardiovascular disease (CVD). Lipoprotein apheresis (LA) is recommended as first-line lipid-lowering treatment (LLT) for homozygous (ho) FH. METHODS: Efficacy of multimodal LLT including lifestyle counseling, drug treatment, and LA was analyzed in 17 pediatric hoFH or compound heterozygous (c-het) FH patients, who commenced chronic LA in Germany before the age of 18. RESULTS: At time of diagnosis, mean low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) concentration was 19.6 mmol/l (756 mg/dl). Multimodal LLT resulted in 73% reduction of mean LDL-C concentration including a 62% contribution of LA. Only three children (18%) achieved mean LDL-C concentrations below the recommended pediatric target of 3.5 mmol/l (135 mg/dl). In 13 patients (76%) during chronic LA, neither cardiovascular events occurred nor was CVD progression detected clinically or by routine imaging techniques. In four patients (24%), cardiovascular events documented progression of CVD despite weekly LA, including one death due to coronary and cerebrovascular CVD which was not stabilized after commencing LA. Based on the mutational status, only 6 out of the 17 children were candidates for proprotein convertase subtilisin-kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibition. Two already responded with further LDL-C decrease by 40%. CONCLUSIONS: Next to drug therapy, regular LA is an essential component of LLT for approaching LDL-C targets in children with hoFH or c-hetFH, which was successful only in a minority of children. Progression of CVD morbidity and resulting mortality remain unresolved issues. Early and intensified multimodal LLT guided by risk factors beyond LDL-C concentration is needed to improve outcome.

Prevention of cardiovascular complications in patients with Lp(a)-hyperlipoproteinemia and progressive cardiovascular disease by long-term lipoprotein apheresis according to German national guidelines.

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is an independent cardiovascular risk factor playing a causal role for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (CVD). Lipoprotein apheresis (LA) is a safe well-tolerated outpatient treatment to lower LDL-C and Lp(a) by 60-70%, and is the ultimate escalating therapeutic option in patients with hyperlipoproteinemias (HLP) involving LDL particles. Major therapeutic effect of LA is preventing cardiovascular events. Lp(a)-HLP associated with progressive CVD has been approved as indication for regular LA in Germany since 2008. The Pro(a)LiFe-study investigated with a prospective multicenter design the long-term preventive effect of LA on incidence rates of cardiovascular events prospectively over a period of 5 years in 170 consecutive patients who commenced regular LA. During a median period of 4.7 years of the pre-LA period, Lp(a) associated progressive CVD became apparent. Apolipoprotein(a) (apo(a)) isoforms and polymorphisms at the apo(a) gene (LPA) were analyzed to assess hypothetical clinical correlations. 154 patients (90.6%) completed 5­years follow-up. Significant decline of the mean annual major adverse cardiac event (MACE) rate was observed from 0.41 ± 0.45 two years prior to regular LA to 0.06 ± 0.11 during 5 years with regular LA (p < 0.0001). 95.3% of patients expressed at least one small apo(a) isoform. Calculation of isoform specific concentrations allowed to confirm the equivalence of 60 mg/dl or 120 nmol/l as Lp(a) thresholds of the German LA guideline. Results of 5 years prospective follow-up confirmed that LA has a lasting effect on prevention of cardiovascular events in patients with Lp(a)-HLP and afore progressive CVD.

Use of plasma exchange or double filtration plasmapheresis to reduce body burden of polychlorinated biphenyls: A pilot trial.

The aim of the study was to examine whether plasma exchange (PE) or selective double filtration plasmapheresis (DFPP) is able to reduce the internal Polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) burden of highly exposed participants of the health effects in high-level exposure to PCB (HELPcB) cohort. HELPcB is a surveillance program for former PCB-exposed workers of a German capacitor recycling company. After comparative evaluation of PE and DFPP in a phase I, DFPP was chosen as method for further treatment. In phase II, five participants underwent DFPP at weekly intervals for the duration of 12 weeks. Six PCB species were selected as indicators and were analyzed in the plasma before and after each treatment and 4 weeks after the last treatment. The PCB levels before and after each DFPP treatment showed a significant reduction in PCB blood levels; however, there was no significant change in PCB levels within the samples collected before each treatment as compared with the samples collected in the following week before treatment. Even the difference between PCB levels at the onset of the study and 4 weeks after the last treatment was not significant. The results of this pilot trial do not encourage further investigations in using therapeutic apheresis to reduce the PCB body burden.

Lipoprotein Apheresis for Lipoprotein(a)-Associated Cardiovascular Disease: Prospective 5 Years of Follow-Up and Apolipoprotein(a) Characterization.

OBJECTIVE: Lipoprotein(a)-hyperlipoproteinemia (Lp(a)-HLP) along with progressive cardiovascular disease has been approved as indication for regular lipoprotein apheresis (LA) in Germany since 2008. We aimed to study the long-term preventive effect of LA and to assess hypothetical clinical correlations of apolipoprotein(a) (apo(a)) by analyzing genotypes and phenotypes. APPROACH AND RESULTS: This prospective observational multicenter study included 170 patients with Lp(a)-HLP and progressive cardiovascular disease (48.9 years median age at diagnosis) despite other cardiovascular risk factors, including low-density lipoprotein cholesterol had maximally been treated (mean baseline low-density lipoprotein cholesterol: measured, 2.56 mmol/L [98.9 mg/dL] and corrected, 1.72 mmol/L [66.3 mg/dL]). Patients were prospectively investigated during a 5-year period about annual incidence rates of cardiovascular events. In addition, apo(a) isoforms and polymorphisms at the apo(a) gene (LPA) were characterized. One hundred fifty-four patients (90.6%) completed 5 years of follow-up. Mean Lp(a) concentration before commencing regular LA was 108.1 mg/dL. This was reduced by a single LA treatment by 68.1% on average. Significant decline of the mean annual cardiovascular event rate was observed from 0.58±0.53 2 years before regular LA to 0.11±0.15 thereafter (P<0.0001); 95.3% of patients expressed at least 1 small apo(a) isoform. Small apo(a) isoform (35.2%) carrying phenotypes were not tagged by single-nucleotide polymorphisms rs10455872 or rs3798220. CONCLUSIONS: Results of 5 years of prospective follow-up confirm that LA has a lasting effect on prevention of cardiovascular events in patients with Lp(a)-HLP. Patients clinically selected by progressive cardiovascular disease were characterized by a highly frequent expression of small apo(a) isoforms. Only Lp(a) concentration seemed to comprehensively reflect Lp(a)-associated cardiovascular risk, however.

Lipoprotein apheresis for Lp(a)-hyperlipoproteinemia with progressive cardiovascular disease--Additional particular aspects of the Pro(a)LiFe multicenter trial.

Lipoprotein apheresis (LA) can lower LDL-cholesterol and Lp(a) by 60%-70% and is the final escalating option in patients with hyperlipoproteinemias involving LDL or Lp(a) particles. Major therapeutic effect of LA is preventing cardiovascular events. In Germany since 2008 a reimbursement guideline has been implemented accepting to establish the indication for LA not only for familial or severe forms of hypercholesterolemia but also based on Lp(a)-hyperlipoproteinemia associated with a progressive course of cardiovascular disease, that persists despite effective treatment of other concomitant cardiovascular risk factors. The Pro(a)LiFe-study confirmed with a prospective multicenter design that LA can be regarded as an important therapeutic approach to effectively reduce Lp(a) plasma levels and prevent cardiovascular events in this particular high-risk patient group. Results support that Lp(a) may be a major causal factor for precipitating mechanisms of accelerated progression of cardiovascular disease (CVD). Indication for LA based on measurement of Lp(a) as part of risk assessment is supported by the following conditions: progressive CVD as assessed clinically and with imaging techniques, established maximally tolerated lipid lowering drug treatment, recent cardiovascular events despite efficient drug treatment, out of the ordinary frequency of cardiovascular events, early CVD, or positive family history of early CVD. Still existing difficulties with Lp(a) laboratory measurement require a practical approach to establish the indication for LA considering the 60 mg/dl threshold of German guidelines with selecting an Lp(a) assay which has been calibrated for mass.

Lipoprotein apheresis results in plaque stabilization and prevention of cardiovascular events: comments on the prospective Pro(a)LiFe study.

Elevated lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) has emerged as an important independent cardiovascular risk factor, and causal association has been accepted with adverse outcome in atherosclerotic disease. Lipoprotein apheresis (LA) can lower low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol and Lp(a) by 60-70 % and is the final escalating therapeutic option in patients with hyperlipoproteinemias (HLP) involving LDL or Lp(a) particles. Major therapeutic effect of LA is preventing cardiovascular events. Stabilizing plaque morphology might be an important underlying mechanism of action. In Germany, since 2008, a reimbursement guideline has been implemented to establish the indication for LA not only for familial or severe forms of hypercholesterolemia but also for Lp(a)-HLP associated with a progressive course of cardiovascular disease, that persists despite effective treatment of other concomitant cardiovascular risk factors, i.e. isolated Lp(a)-HLP. The Pro(a)LiFe-study confirmed with a prospective multicenter design that LA can effectively reduce Lp(a) plasma levels and prevent cardiovascular events.

Lipoprotein apheresis in patients with maximally tolerated lipid-lowering therapy, lipoprotein(a)-hyperlipoproteinemia, and progressive cardiovascular disease: prospective observational multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) hyperlipoproteinemia is a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease, which is not affected by treatment of other cardiovascular risk factors. This study sought to assess the effect of chronic lipoprotein apheresis (LA) on the incidence of cardiovascular events in patients with progressive cardiovascular disease receiving maximally tolerated lipid-lowering treatment. METHODS AND RESULTS: In a prospective observational multicenter study, 170 patients were investigated who commenced LA because of Lp(a)-hyperlipoproteinemia and progressive cardiovascular disease. Patients were characterized regarding plasma lipid status, lipid-lowering drug treatment, and variants at the LPA gene locus. The incidence rates of cardiovascular events 2 years before (y-2 and y-1) and prospectively 2 years during LA treatment (y+1, y+2) were compared. The mean age of patients was 51 years at the first cardiovascular event and 57 years at the first LA. Before LA, mean low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and Lp(a) were 2.56±1.04 mmol·L(-1) (99.0±40.1 mg·dL(-1)) and Lp(a) 3.74±1.63 µmol·L(-1) (104.9±45.7 mg·dL(-1)), respectively. Mean annual rates for major adverse coronary events declined from 0.41 for 2 years before LA to 0.09 for 2 years during LA (P<0.0001). Event rates including all vascular beds declined from 0.61 to 0.16 (P<0.0001). Analysis of single years revealed increasing major adverse coronary event rates from 0.30 to 0.54 (P=0.001) for y-2 to y-1 before LA, decline to 0.14 from y-1 to y+1 (P<0.0001) and to 0.05 from y+1 to y+2 (P=0.014). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with Lp(a)-hyperlipoproteinemia, progressive cardiovascular disease, and maximally tolerated lipid-lowering medication, LA effectively lowered the incidence rate of cardiovascular events. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL: https://drks-neu.uniklinik-freiburg.de. Unique identifier: DRKS00003119.

Neurologic diseases of the central nervous system with pathophysiologically relevant autoantibodies--perspectives for immunoadsorption.

Immediate antibody elimination, pulsed induction of antibody redistribution, and immunomodulation are major forces of efficacy of therapeutic apheresis (i.e. plasma exchange [PE] or immunoadsorption [IA]) for autoimmune neurologic disorders. Therapeutic apheresis can offer rapid response for severe acute neurologic symptoms, and stable rehabilitation in long-term clinical courses being refractory to drug based strategies or complicated by drug side effects. PE or IA in these situations must be considered as part of multimodal or escalating immune treatment strategies in combination or in competition with intravenously administered immunoglobulins (ivIg), corticosteroids, the full spectrum of immunosuppressive drugs, and bioengineered antibodies. Selective IA is increasingly replacing PE due to its superior safety profile and increasing knowledge on pathogenic relevance of autoantibodies. Recent experiences in autoimmune diseases of the central nervous system, e.g. multiple sclerosis, neuromyelitis optica, and autoimmune encephalitis confirmed this concept.

RheoNet registry analysis of rheopheresis for microcirculatory disorders with a focus on age-related macular degeneration.

The purpose of establishing the RheoNet registry was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of rheopheresis, a specific method of therapeutic apheresis used to treat microcirculatory disorders. Apheresis centers providing rheopheresis therapy and physicians caring for the underlying disease were asked to participate in the registry, and the registry data were analyzed for safety and tolerability. Age-related macular degeneration (AMD) was selected as a model disease to evaluate efficacy. The RheoNet registry was successfully established recording 7722 rheopheresis treatments of 1110 patients, including 833 AMD patients. The mean age of patients was 72 years. Adverse events (AE) were reported in 5.67% of treatments, but termination of the treatment session was only required in 0.48%. Transient hypotension was the most frequently reported AE. No age-related increase in AE was observed. Ophthalmological data of 428 eyes (of 279 treated patients) with dry AMD could be analyzed; 85 eyes of 55 untreated AMD patients served as the control. At 6.75 +/- 5.25 months post-baseline, 42% of the treated eyes had improved visual acuity. The proportion of eyes with a decline in visual acuity was 17%, compared to 40% in the untreated controls (P < 0.01). The RheoNet registry has been successfully established and data analysis revealed that rheopheresis is a safe outpatient treatment for microcirculatory disorders. Moreover, RheoNet currently provides the largest evaluation of the efficacy of rheopheresis for dry AMD. Registry analysis contributes to a safe and appropriate use of rheopheresis in clinical practice.

Rheopheresis for idiopathic sudden hearing loss: results from a large prospective, multicenter, randomized, controlled clinical trial.

Idiopathic sudden hearing loss (ISHL) has been suggested to precipitate as final common pathway of microcirculatory impairment of the inner ear associated with a variety of etiologies and characterized by a local hyperviscosity syndrome in cochlear vessels. Therefore, we investigated the effect of Rheopheresis, a method of therapeutic apheresis reducing plasma viscosity and improving microcirculation on hearing recovery. Patients were randomly assigned to receive two Rheopheresis treatments, or treatment according to current German guidelines consisting either of i.v. corticosteroids (methylprednisolon 250 mg for 3 days and subsequent oral dosing with tapering to zero) or i.v. hemodilution (500 mL 6% hydroxyethyl starch plus 600 mg pentoxifylline per day), each applied for 10 days. The primary outcome parameter was absolute recovery of hearing as measured by pure tone audiometry 10 days after the start of treatment. Secondary outcomes were recovery of hearing at day 42, the improvement of speech audiometry, tinnitus and feeling of pressure and the frequency of adverse events. In total, 240 patients with sudden hearing loss were enrolled from otorhinolaryngological departments at hospitals as well as out-patient clinics in Germany. Analysis was performed for the intention-to-treat as well as per protocol population. Mean absolute recovery of hearing on day 10 within the intention-to-treat population (ITT, n = 193) was 23.95 dB (SD 15.05) in the Rheopheresis group and 24.29 dB (SD 15.48) in the control group. Equal efficacy of Rheopheresis and tested standard treatments was demonstrated (P = 0.00056). Single Rheopheresis led to a higher recovery of hearing after 48 h in patients with high plasma viscosity (>1.8 mPas s; P = 0.029) or high total protein (>74 g/dL; P = 0.02). However, an overall good recovery of ISHL was observed with none of the tested therapies being superior regarding the primary outcome parameter. Improvement of health-related quality of life as documented by the SF36 was higher in the Rheopheresis group, exhibiting a significant difference for the physical summary scale at the final follow-up at day 42 (P = 0.006). In conclusion, Rheopheresis proved to be an effective treatment option within the ENT armamentarium for ISHL. Two Rheopheresis treatments within 3 days lasting for about 2 h each could be used to replace a 10-day infusion regimen, especially in patients who desire fast recovery from acute hearing loss. Also, this may be a second line treatment option for patients refractory to i.v. corticosteroids or hemodilution.

Rheopheresis for sudden sensorineural hearing loss.

Patients suffering from sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSHL), especially those with hearing impairment refractory to infusion therapy, need new therapeutic options. Fibrinogen-LDL-apheresis, covering Rheopheresis and HELP-apheresis for the indication of SSHL, proved to be an effective treatment option within the therapeutic armamentarium for SSHL in two randomized controlled trials including each more than 200 patients, and has also been shown to be an effective treatment option for patients refractory to the first line standard treatment. Fibrinogen-LDL-apheresis effects an immediate pulsed reduction of plasma viscosity as well as whole blood viscosity, hypothesized to lead to a sustained microcirculatory recovery, thus improving the natural course of acute microcirculatory impairment significantly. The solid body of evidence provided by investigations on fibrinogen-LDL-apheresis in recent years has been recognized by German SSHL guidelines, proposing fibrinogen-lowering treatments like this as part of a multimodality approach. Superiority of fibrinogen-LDL-apheresis over established first line standard treatments could not been shown in general. In consequence, no regular reimbursement by health insurances is available, in particular facing the current policy of health insurances for initial therapeutic nihilism at the acute onset of SSHL. Patients can apply for individual reimbursement or must pay the cost for the treatment. Refractory patients hopefully will profit by growing experiences.

Plasma exchange and immunoadsorption for autoimmune neurologic diseases - current guidelines and future perspectives.

There is increasing interest from neurologists to use therapeutic apheresis in autoimmune neurologic diseases due to growing knowledge of pathogenic relevance of autoantibodies. Developments in that field have been summarized in this review focusing on German guidelines and recent results from clinical research. Therapeutic apheresis can offer a therapeutic armamentarium with rapid response for severe acute neurologic symptoms, and a drug-free option for clinical courses being refractory to drug based strategies or complicated by drug side effects. Plasma exchange (PE) as the classical method has become part of current guidelines within basic and escalating immunomodulatory treatments of autoimmune neurologic diseases, and in daily practice gets increasingly replaced by selective immunoadsorption (IA) due to its equivalent efficacy in combination with a superior safety profile. Therapeutic effects of PE and IA in autoantibody mediated diseases can be attributed to 3 major mechanisms: immediate intravascular reduction of (auto-)antibody concentration, pulsed induction of antibody redistribution, and subsequent immunomodulatory changes. 5 treatments over a period of 8-10 days seem to be an appropriate regimen to restore neurologic function in acute flares or relapses of autoimmune neuropathies, e.g. myasthenic crisis, Guillain-Barré-syndrome, and steroid refractory relapse of multiple sclerosis. Especially in MS a better understanding is needed, who are the best candidates for IA.

Dextran-sulfate-adsorption of atherosclerotic lipoproteins from whole blood or separated plasma for lipid-apheresis--comparison of performance characteristics with DALI and Lipidfiltration.

For many years dextran sulfate adsorption (DSA) treatment of separated plasma has been an established technology for low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-elimination. Recently a system for the treatment of whole blood based on DSA was introduced into clinical practice. To further characterize DSA treatment of whole blood, the performance characteristics of both DSA modalities were compared at two investigational sites with two alternative LDL apheresis systems being already in routine clinical use. In prospective cross-over design, DSA whole blood treatment was compared with a whole blood polyacrylate LDL adsorption system (DALI) in one study group. DSA for plasma treatment was compared with Lipidfiltration in cross-over design in a second study group. In total, 12 patients on chronic LDL apheresis received 169 treatments. Six patients were treated twice with whole blood polyacrylate adsorption and twice with whole blood DSA. LDL-cholesterol (74.9-78.0%) and lipoprotein (a) (72.1-73.3%) were reduced by both with equal efficacy. DSA achieved a significantly higher reduction rate of fibrinogen. Another six patients were treated eight times with DSA plasma adsorption followed by 16 Lipidfiltration treatments. LDL-cholesterol (67.0-70.2%) and lipoprotein (a) (69.2-73.7%) were reduced by both with equal efficacy. Fibrinogen was eliminated more efficiently by Lipidfiltration (50.2 vs. 38.5%). DSA proved to be a safe and effective in both treatment modes, for plasma as well as for whole blood. At the discretion of the apheresis specialist, depending upon the status of national approval, DSA of whole blood complements the armamentarium of powerful modalities for extracorporeal elimination of atherosclerotic lipoproteins to meet specific individual, medical, or logistic needs.