To summarize the role of therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) in critically ill adults and children with severe sepsis.
Data collection
A systematic search was performed using the following databases: Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Cochrane from January 1990 till December 2022. Comparative studies of TPE in severe sepsis were selected. Adult and pediatric data were analyzed separately.
Data synthesis
Eight randomized control trials and 6 observational studies (n = 50,142 patients) were included. Centrifugal TPE was the most common modality (209/280, 74.6% adults and 952/1026, 92.7% children). Every TPE study utilized different volume exchanges. Most TPE sessions (1173/1306, 89.8%) employed fresh frozen plasma (FFP) as replacement fluid and heparin as anticoagulant. Adults with severe sepsis supported with TPE using FFP had lower mortality (risk ratio, RR: 0.64 [95% confidence interval, CI: 0.49, 0.84]) compared to those who did not. In contrast, TPE was associated with increased mortality in septic children without thrombocytopenia-associated multiorgan failure (RR: 2.23, 95% CI: 1.93, 2.57). There was no difference in outcomes in patients supported with centrifugal and membrane TPE. In both populations, patients supported on TPE as a continuous regime had poorer outcome.
Conclusion
Current evidence indicates that TPE is a potential adjunct therapy in adults with severe sepsis but not in children.
MayrFBYendeSAngusDC. Epidemiology of severe sepsis. Virulence. 2014;5(1):4-11. https://doi.org/10.4161/viru.27372. Epub 2013 Dec 11. PMID: 24335434; PMCID: PMC3916382.
2.
Dayangac-ErdenDDurusu-TanrioverM. Chapter 13 – sepsis: A challenging disease with new promises for personalized medicine and biomarker discovery. In: DeignerH-PKohlM, ed. Precision medicine. Academic Press;2018:297-314, ISBN 9780128053645, https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-805364-5.00013-5.
SchwartzJWintersJLPadmanabhanA, et al.Guidelines on the use of therapeutic apheresis in clinical practice-evidence-based approach from the writing committee of the American society for apheresis: The sixth special issue. J Clin Apher.2013;28(3):145-284. https://doi.org/10.1002/jca.21276.
5.
HuangMCaiSSuJ. The pathogenesis of sepsis and potential therapeutic targets. Int J Mol Sci.2019;20(21):5376. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms20215376.
6.
BauerPROstermannMRussellL, et al. Plasma exchange in the intensive care unit: A narrative review. Intensive Care Med.2022;48(10):1382-1396. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-022-06793-z. Epub 2022 Aug 12. PMID: 35960275; PMCID: PMC9372988.
7.
KnaupHStahlKSchmidtB, et al.Early therapeutic plasma exchange in septic shock: A prospective open-label nonrandomized pilot study focusing on safety, hemodynamics, vascular barrier function, and biologic markers. Crit Care (London, England)2018; 22(1): 285. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-018-2220-9.
8.
BenjaminRJHallowell ChurchillW. Chapter 26—therapeutic plasma exchange. In: SamuelsMAFeskeSK, eds. Office practice of neurology. 2nd ed.Churchill Livingstone;2003:238-243, ISBN 9780443065576, https://doi.org/10.1016/B0-44-306557-8/50028-9.
RimmerEHoustonBLKumarA, et al.The efficacy and safety of plasma exchange in patients with sepsis and septic shock: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Crit Care2014;18(6):699. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-014-0699-2. PMID: 25527094; PMCID: PMC4318234.
11.
PadmanabhanAConnelly-SmithLAquiN, et al.Guidelines on the use of therapeutic apheresis in clinical practice – evidence-based approach from the Writing Committee of the American Society for Apheresis: The eighth special issue. J Clin Apher.2019;34(3):171-354. https://doi.org/10.1002/jca.21705.
12.
PageMJMcKenzieJEBossuytPM, et al.The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Br Med J.2021;372:n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71.
13.
pyaemia. Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary, Merriam-Webster, Available athttps://www.merriam-webster.com. Accessed 1 September 2021
BoneRCBalkRACerraFB, et al.Definitions for sepsis and organ failure and guidelines for the use of innovative therapies in sepsis. The ACCP/SCCM Consensus Conference Committee. American College of Chest Physicians/Society of Critical Care Medicine. Chest1992;101:1644-1655.
18.
HotchkissRSMoldawerLLOpalSMReinhartKTurnbullIRVincentJL. Sepsis and septic shock. Nat Rev. Dis Primers2016;2:16045. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrdp.2016.45.
19.
McGovernMGiannoniEKuesterH, et al.Challenges in developing a consensus definition of neonatal sepsis. Pediatr Res.2020;88(1):14-26. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41390-020-0785-x.
20.
HayesRHartnettJSemovaG, et al. Neonatal sepsis definitions from randomised clinical trials. Pediatr Res.2021(Nov). doi: 10.1038/s41390-021-01749-3. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 34743180.
21.
BornSDameCMatthäus-KrämerC, et al. Epidemiology of sepsis among children and neonates in Germany: Results from an observational study based on nationwide diagnosis-related groups data between 2010 and 2016. Crit Care Med.2021;49(7):1049-1057. https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0000000000004919.
22.
HigginsJPAltmanDGGøtzschePC, et al.The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ (Clinical Research ed.)2011;343:d5928. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.d5928.
23.
WellsGAWellsGSheaB, et al.The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomised studies in meta-analyses. 2014.
24.
LuoDWanXLiuJTongT. Optimally estimating the sample mean from the sample size, median, mid-range and/or mid-quartile range. Stat Methods Med Res.2018;27:1785-1805.
25.
StahlKWandPSeeligerB, et al.Clinical and biochemical endpoints and predictors of response to plasma exchange in septic shock: Results from a randomized controlled trial. Crit Care. 2022;26(1):134. Published 2022 May 12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-022-04003-2.
26.
BusundRKouklineVUtrobinUNedashkovskyE. Plasmapheresis in severe sepsis and septic shock: A prospective, randomised, controlled trial. Intensive Care Med.2002;28(10):1434-1439. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-002-1410-7.
FaqihiFAlharthyAAbdulazizS, et al.Therapeutic plasma exchange in patients with life-threatening COVID-19: A randomised controlled clinical trial. Int J Antimicrob Agents.2021:57(5):106334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2021.106334.
29.
LuoXLiXLaiX, et al.Therapeutic plasma exchange in patients with sepsis: Secondary analysis of a cluster-randomized controlled trial. J Clin Apher. 2023;38(1):55–62. https://doi.org/10.1002/jca.22027. Epub 2022 Oct 31.
30.
ReevesJHButtWWShannF, et al.Continuous plasmafiltration in sepsis syndrome. Plasmafiltration in Sepsis Study Group. Crit Care Med.1999;27(10):2096-2104. https://doi.org/10.1097/00003246-199910000-00003.
31.
SaifeeNHEvansHLMagaretAS, et al.Outcomes in necrotizing soft tissue infections treated with therapeutic plasma exchange. Transfusion2017;57(6):1407-1413. https://doi.org/10.1111/trf.14067.
32.
KeithPDWellsAHHodgesJFastSHAdamsAScottLK. The therapeutic efficacy of adjunct therapeutic plasma exchange for septic shock with multiple organ failure: A single-center experience. Crit Care (London, England)2020;24(1):518. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-020-03241-6.
33.
NguyenTCHanYYKissJE, et al.Intensive plasma exchange increases a disintegrin and metalloprotease with thrombospondin motifs-13 activity and reverses organ dysfunction in children with thrombocytopenia-associated multiple organ failure. Crit Care Med.2008;36(10):2878-2887. https://doi.org/10.1097/ccm.0b013e318186aa49.
34.
FortenberryJDNguyenTGrunwellJR, et al.Therapeutic plasma exchange in children with thrombocytopenia-associated multiple organ failure: The thrombocytopenia-associated multiple organ failure network prospective experience. Crit Care Med.2019;47(3):e173-e181. https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0000000000003559.
35.
SevketogluEYildizdasDHorozOO,et al.Use of therapeutic plasma exchange in children with thrombocytopenia-associated multiple organ failure in the Turkish thrombocytopenia-associated multiple organ failure network. Pediatr Crit Care Med.2014;15(8):e354-e359. https://doi.org/10.1097/PCC.0000000000000227.
36.
LimaLMMcCrackenCEFortenberryJDHebbarKB. Use of plasma exchange in pediatric severe sepsis in children’s hospitals. J Crit Care.2018;45:114-120, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrc.2018.01.028.
37.
AygünFVarolFDurakC, et al.Evaluation of continuous renal replacement therapy and therapeutic plasma exchange, in severe sepsis or septic shock in Critically Ill Children. Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania)2019;55(7):350. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina55070350.
38.
LongEJTaylorADelzoppoC,et al.A randomised controlled trial of plasma filtration in severe paediatric sepsis. Crit Care Resusc.2013;15(3):198-204.
39.
NguyenTCCarcilloJA. Bench-to-bedside review: Thrombocytopenia-associated multiple organ failure–a newly appreciated syndrome in the critically ill. Crit Care (London, England)2006;10(6):235. https://doi.org/10.1186/cc5064.
40.
CarcilloJAPoddBAnejaR, et al.Pathophysiology of pediatric multiple organ dysfunction syndrome. Pediatr Crit Care Med.2017;18(3_suppl Suppl 1):S32-S45. https://doi.org/10.1097/PCC.0000000000001052.
41.
RockGAShumakKHBuskardNA, et al.Comparison of plasma exchange with plasma infusion in the treatment of thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura. Canadian Apheresis Study Group. N Engl J Med.1991;325(6): 393-397. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM199108083250604.
42.
StegmayrB. G: Plasma exchange in patients with septic shock including acute renal failure. Blood Purif1996;14:102-108. https://doi.org/10.1159/000170251.
43.
DavidSBodeCPutensenCWelteTStahlK, Exchange study group. Adjuvant therapeutic plasma exchange in septic shock. Intensive Care Med.2021;47(3):352-354. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-020-06339-1.
44.
AnejaRKCarcilloJA. Differences between adult and pediatric septic shock. Minerva Anestesiol.2011;77(10):986-992.
45.
FilipovJJZlatkovBKDimitrovEP. Plasma exchange in clinical practice. In: TutarYTutarL, eds. Plasma Medicine – Concepts and Clinical Applications. IntechOpen; 2018. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.76094.
46.
KesPJanssensMEBašić-JukićNKljakM. A randomized crossover study comparing membrane and centrifugal therapeutic plasma exchange procedures. Transfusion2016;56(12):3065-3072. https://doi.org/10.1111/trf.13850.
47.
HaferCGollaPGerickeM, et al.Membrane versus centrifuge-based therapeutic plasma exchange: A randomized prospective crossover study. Int Urol Nephrol.2016;48(1):133-138. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-015-1137-3.
ShazBH. Chapter 68 – therapeutic plasma exchange. In: HillyerCDShazBHZimringJCAbshireTC, eds. Transfusion medicine and hemostasis. Academic Press;2009:383-397, ISBN 9780123744326. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-374432-6.00068-3.
50.
ZhangLZhangJ-PLiuY, et al.Plasma transfusion promoted reprogramming CD4+ T lymphocytes immune response in severe sepsis mice model through modulating the exosome protein galectin 9. Cell Transplant.2020;29(Jan-Dec):963689720947347. http://doi.org/10.1177/0963689720947347
51.
ShrierIBoivinJFSteeleRJ, et al.Should meta-analyses of interventions include observational studies in addition to randomized controlled trials? A critical examination of underlying principles. Am J Epidemiol.2007;166(10):1203-1209. https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwm189.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
