Yoichiro Shindo ¹, Keiichi Mitsuyama ², Hiroshi Yamasaki ^1 2 3, Tetsuro Imai ⁴, Shinichiro Yoshioka ^1 2, Kotaro Kuwaki ^1 2, Ryosuke Yamauchi ^1 2, Tetsuhiro Yoshimura ^1 2, Toshihiro Araki ^1 2, Masaru Morita ^1 2, Kozo Tsuruta ^1 2, Sayo Yamasaki ¹, Kei Fukami ⁵, Takuji 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/

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

Takumi Fukuchi ¹, Hideaki Koga ¹, Shinji Kaichi ¹, Akira Ishikawa ², Takahisa Horita ³, Ryota Araki ⁴, Atsushi Yokota ⁵, Yukiomi Namba ⁶, Masahiro Kyo ⁷, Takaaki Eguchi ⁸, Keiji 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/

Keiji Shimazu ¹, Takumi Fukuchi ², Insung Kim ³, Yuki Noguchi ³, Megumi Iwata ¹, Shintaro Koyama ^2 4, Satoshi Ubukata ², Atsuo 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/