Scientific corner

Safety and efficacy of single-needle leukocyte apheresis for treatment of ulcerative colitis

Yoichiro Shindo 1Keiichi Mitsuyama 2Hiroshi Yamasaki 1 2 3Tetsuro Imai 4Shinichiro Yoshioka 1 2Kotaro Kuwaki 1 2Ryosuke Yamauchi 1 2Tetsuhiro Yoshimura 1 2Toshihiro Araki 1 2Masaru Morita 1 2Kozo Tsuruta 1 2Sayo Yamasaki 1Kei Fukami 5Takuji Torimura, Ther Apher Dial 2020 Oct;24(5):503-510.

Single-needle (SN) apheresis may be safe and effective and may reduce patient burden during UC treatment. Nevertheless, further comparative studies are needed.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32526089/

Scientific corner

Single Needle Granulocyte and Monocyte Apheresis for Ulcerative Colitis: A Retrospective Safety Analysis

Tetsurou Imai 1Hiroshi Yamasaki 2 3 4Keiichi Mitsuyama 3Osamu Yamaga 1Gaku Sugihara 1Yusuke Kaida 5Ryo Shibata 5Takuma Hazama 5Shinichiro Yoshioka 2 3Takuji Torimura 2Kei Fukami 5Norio Yamashita 6

Kurume Med J. 2020 Jul 1;66(1):1-7. doi: 10.2739/kurumemedj.MS661002. Epub 2020 Jan 15.

Introduction: Granulocyte and monocyte apheresis (GMA) is an effective treatment strategy for active ulcerative colitis (UC) in Japan. Single needle (SN) apheresis reduces needle puncture pain in patients because it requires only one puncture site. We evaluated whether single-needle apheresis could be a safe and effective means of reducing patient burden. Method: We performed a retrospective study of active UC patients who were treated with either SN apheresis or conventional double-needle (DN) apheresis at the Kurume university hospital from April 2014 to March 2018. All the patients treated with GMA after September 2016 underwent SN apheresis. Thus, the two groups predominantly belonged to different time periods. We assessed the safety of SN apheresis. Result: Six patients underwent SN apheresis, and 6 underwent DN apheresis. The average time to the start of apheresis was significantly reduced from 23.1 minutes in the case of DN apheresis to 12.6 minutes for SN apheresis. In addition, the number of difficult punctures was significantly reduced with SN apheresis. There were no differences in adverse events between SN and DN apheresis. Treatment benefits, remission rate and disease activity were similar between SN and DN apheresis.Conclusion: SN apheresis reduced both the time to treatment initiation and pain during puncture, and there was no difference in the number of blood clotting episodes as compared with DN. Although further comparative studies are needed, SN apheresis may be a safe alternative for patients to reduce the strain of treatment.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31941846/

https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/kurumemedj/66/1/66_MS661002/_article

Scientific corner

Single-Needle Intensive Granulocyte and Monocyte Adsorptive Apheresis Is Suitable for Elderly Patients With Active Ulcerative Colitis Taking no Corticosteroids or Biologics

Takumi Fukuchi 1Hideaki Koga 1Shinji Kaichi 1Akira Ishikawa 2Takahisa Horita 3Ryota Araki 4Atsushi Yokota 5Yukiomi Namba 6Masahiro Kyo 7Takaaki Eguchi 8Keiji Shimazu 9 Ther Apher Dial 2019 Jun;23(3):224-232

Single-needle intensive granulocyte/monocyte adsorptive apheresis might be a novel alternative therapeutic option for elderly ulcerative colitis patients before considering corticosteroids.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31025824/

Scientific corner

Efficacy and usefulness of new single-needle Intensive granulocyte and monocyte adsorptive apheresis in active ulcerative colitis patients without corticosteroids and biologics

Keiji Shimazu 1Takumi Fukuchi 2Insung Kim 3Yuki Noguchi 3Megumi Iwata 1Shintaro Koyama 2 4Satoshi Ubukata 2Atsuo Tanaka 1 , Ther Apher Dial 2016 Aug;20(4):383-9.

Intensive granulocyte and monocyte adsorptive apheresis (GMA) twice weekly is effective and safe for patients with active ulcerative colitis (UC), but the requirement for maintaining two blood access routes is problematic. Here we compared the efficacy and safety of one-route blood access intensive GMA using a single-needle (SN) and conventional two-route blood access intensive GMA using a double-needle (DN) in patients with active UC not undergoing corticosteroid therapy. Among 80 active UC patients, 38 patients received SN intensive GMA and 42 patients received DN intensive GMA. The clinical remission ratio and mucosal healing ratio at 6 weeks, and the cumulative non-relapse ratio at 52 weeks did not differ significantly between groups. In addition, no serious or mild adverse effects were observed in SN intensive GMA. SN intensive GMA may be an adequate and novel therapeutic option for active UC as an alternative therapy before using corticosteroids.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27523079/

Contact UsFor more information

Contact Us