Cryofiltration in the Treatment of Cryoglobulinemia and HLA Antibody-Incompatible Transplantation

Department of Nephrology and Transplantation, University Hospital, University of Warwick, UK.
Therapeutic apheresis and dialysis: official peer-reviewed journal of the International Society for Apheresis, the Japanese Society for Apheresis, the Japanese Society for Dialysis Therapy (Impact Factor: 1.53). 02/2012; 16(1):91-6. DOI: 10.1111/j.1744-9987.2011.01004.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Cryofiltration is a technique in which plasma is separated from blood and chilled, leading to the formation of "cryogel", a composite of heparin, fibronectin, fibrinogen, immunoglobulins, and other proteins. This is retained by further filtration and plasma is returned to the patient. There may be a role for cryofiltration in the treatment of cryoglobulinemia or where the application of other forms of plasmapheresis or immunoadsorption is limited. Five patients received six courses of cryofiltration. Two patients had cryoglobulinemia and three were treated before HLA antibody-incompatible renal transplantation. The treatment was associated with few adverse effects, and it was possible to treat up to 120 mL/kg plasma per session. There was a good clinical response in four patients. One patient was switched back to double filtration plasmapheresis (DFPP) because cryofiltration seemed to remove HLA antibodies less effectively, but the other two transplants have excellent function. In the cryoglobulinemia patients there was excellent clearance of cryoglobulins during each treatment (mean decrease of 78.2 (SD 14.1)% per treatment). Compared with DFPP, fewer immunoglobulins were removed and the mean percentage reductions in immunoglobulin G per treatment were 36.0 (4.0)% for cryoglobulinemia and 59.2 (2.5)% for DFPP (P < 0.01), with respective mean plasma volumes of 64.2 (10.3) and 71.1 (6.8) mL/kg treated. Cryofiltration offers a treatment choice in patients with cryoglobulinemia and in those who may not be able to tolerate high-volume DFPP. The technique used in the patients described here was less effective than DFPP; however, use of an alternative fractionator and treatment of higher plasma volumes may enhance the efficiency of cryofiltration.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Live kidney donor transplantation across immunological barriers, either blood group or positive crossmatch [ABO- and human leucocyte antigens (HLA)-incompatible kidney transplantation, respectively], is now practised widely across many transplant centres. This provides transplantation opportunities to patients that hitherto would have been deemed contra-indicated and would subsequently have waited indefinitely for a suitably matched kidney. Protocols have evolved with time as experience has grown and now a variety of desensitization strategies are currently practised to overcome such immunological barriers. In addition, desensitization protocols are complemented by kidney paired donation exchange schemes and therefore incompatible patients now have strategies to either confront or bypass immunological barriers, respectively. As the field expands it is clear that non-transplant clinicians will be exposed to incompatible kidney transplant recipients outside of experienced centres. It is therefore timely to review the evolution of practice that have led to current desensitization modalities, contrast protocols and outcomes of current regimens and speculate on future direction of incompatible kidney transplantation.
    QJM: monthly journal of the Association of Physicians 08/2012; 105(12). DOI:10.1093/qjmed/hcs154 · 2.46 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Humoral sensitization to antigens of the human leukocyte antigen and ABO systems remains one of the largest barriers to further expansion in renal transplantation. This barrier translates into prolonged waiting time and a greater likelihood of death. The number of highly sensitized patients on the renal transplant waiting list continues to increase. This review focuses on the options available to these patients and speculates on future directions for incompatible transplantation. Desensitization protocols (to remove antibodies), kidney-paired donation (to circumvent antibodies) or a hybrid technique involving a combination of both have broadened the access to transplantation for patients disadvantaged by immunologic barriers. However, the risk of antibody-mediated rejection may be increased and warrants caution. Technical advances in antibody characterization using sensitive bead immunoassays and the C1q assay and therapeutic modalities such as complement inhibitors and proteasome inhibitors have been used to avoid or confront these antibody incompatibilities. A growing body of knowledge and literature indicates that these diagnostic and therapeutic modalities can facilitate a safer and more successful treatment course for these difficult-to-treat patients. Rigorous investigations into newer interventions will help in broadening the options for these patients and also expand the living donor pool.
    Current Opinion in Nephrology and Hypertension 09/2013; DOI:10.1097/MNH.0b013e328365b3b9 · 4.24 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Selective apheresis procedures have been developed to target specific molecules, antibodies, or cellular elements in a variety of diseases. The advantage of the selective apheresis procedures over conventional therapeutic plasmapheresis is preservation of other essential plasma components such as albumin, immunoglobulins, and clotting factors. These procedures are more commonly employed in Europe and Japan, and few are available in the USA. Apheresis procedures discussed in this review include the various technologies available for low-density lipoprotein (LDL) apheresis, double filtration plasmapheresis (DFPP), cryofiltration, immunoadsorption procedures, adsorption resins that process plasma, extracorporeal photopheresis, and leukocyte apheresis. J. Clin. Apheresis 28:20-29, 2013. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
    Journal of Clinical Apheresis 02/2013; 28(1):20-9. DOI:10.1002/jca.21265 · 1.58 Impact Factor