Trial reportThe Clinical investigator1994
Comparative long-term experience with immunoadsorption and dextran sulfate cellulose adsorption for extracorporeal elimination of low-density lipoproteins.
Trial report in The Clinical investigator, 1994. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Two low-density lipoprotein (LDL) apheresis methods allowing a specific extracorporeal removal of atherogenic lipoproteins from plasma were compared concerning their efficacy and safety in the long-term therapy of severe familial hypercholesterolemia. Five patients were treated with immunoadsorption (IMA) at weekly intervals over 3 years each, and three patients received weekly therapy with dextran sulfate cellulose adsorption (DSA) for up to 2 years. The mean plasma volume processed per session to decrease total cholesterol to a target level of 100-150 mg/dl at the end of LDL apheresis was significantly lower in DSA than in IMA: 143% vs. 180% of the individual plasma volume. Both LDL apheresis procedures achieved a mean acute reduction of plasma LDL cholesterol by more than 70%. The average interval concentrations of plasma LDL cholesterol obtained without concomitant lipid-lowering medication were 151 +/- 26 mg/dl compared to 351 +/- 65 mg/dl at baseline in the IMA-treated patients and 139 +/- 18 mg/dl compared to 359 +/- 48 mg/dl at baseline in the DSA-treated patients. Two patients from the DSA group died after 2 years of study participation due to a stroke and a sudden cardiac death several days after the last plasma therapy. Treatment-related side effects were infrequent. Long-term therapy with IMA and DSA was associated with symptomatic improvement of coronary artery disease and mobilization of tissue cholesterol deposits. Analysis of coronary angiograms after 3 years of weekly LDL apheresis with IMA revealed in five patients nearly identical atherosclerotic lesions without definite regression or progression.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.