Cargando…

Hämoadsorption zur Blutreinigung – Unvergleichbarkeit der klinisch angebotenen Verfahren

BACKGROUND: In the field of intensive care medicine, but also increasingly in cardiac surgery, the use of adsorptive blood purification technologies for the treatment of hyperinflammatory conditions is becoming progressively more important. In addition to the CytoSorb concept, which is more and more...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Krenn, C. G., Steltzer, H.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Medizin 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8159789/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32583037
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00063-020-00702-2
_version_ 1783700158140121088
author Krenn, C. G.
Steltzer, H.
author_facet Krenn, C. G.
Steltzer, H.
author_sort Krenn, C. G.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: In the field of intensive care medicine, but also increasingly in cardiac surgery, the use of adsorptive blood purification technologies for the treatment of hyperinflammatory conditions is becoming progressively more important. In addition to the CytoSorb concept, which is more and more clinically accepted and currently the most frequently used method, other companies—particularly from China—have recently entered the market with similar concepts. OBJECTIVES: Given this, the aim of this article is to analyze the different aspects of the various hemoadsorption products offered on the market today and to take a critical look at the available evidence. METHODS: Technical features, application-specific characteristics, and the existing evidence of the adsorption technologies CytoSorb® (CytoSorbents(TM) Inc., Monmouth Junction, NJ, USA), Jafron® HA series (Jafron Biomedical Co., Guangdong, China), and Biosky® MG series (Biosun® Medical Technology Co., Foshan City, Guangdong Province, China) were analyzed. The purely substance-specific methods for endotoxin elimination only (Toraymyxin®, Alteco®) were not considered. RESULTS: A comprehensive analysis of these criteria reveals that there are considerable differences between the various available technologies in terms of materials used, adsorption characteristics, application, and available data on safety and clinical experience. Furthermore, it becomes clear that not only the efficacy of blood purification technologies should be considered in terms of an effect–price–performance ratio, but that in particular the safety of the individual technologies is of crucial importance. DISCUSSION: Among the technologies analyzed, CytoSorb currently represents the most investigated and clinically established procedure. Furthermore, it should be noted that clinical results, but particularly safety-relevant aspects, are not transferable between the products due to technically different procedures.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8159789
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Springer Medizin
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-81597892021-06-01 Hämoadsorption zur Blutreinigung – Unvergleichbarkeit der klinisch angebotenen Verfahren Krenn, C. G. Steltzer, H. Med Klin Intensivmed Notfmed Übersichten BACKGROUND: In the field of intensive care medicine, but also increasingly in cardiac surgery, the use of adsorptive blood purification technologies for the treatment of hyperinflammatory conditions is becoming progressively more important. In addition to the CytoSorb concept, which is more and more clinically accepted and currently the most frequently used method, other companies—particularly from China—have recently entered the market with similar concepts. OBJECTIVES: Given this, the aim of this article is to analyze the different aspects of the various hemoadsorption products offered on the market today and to take a critical look at the available evidence. METHODS: Technical features, application-specific characteristics, and the existing evidence of the adsorption technologies CytoSorb® (CytoSorbents(TM) Inc., Monmouth Junction, NJ, USA), Jafron® HA series (Jafron Biomedical Co., Guangdong, China), and Biosky® MG series (Biosun® Medical Technology Co., Foshan City, Guangdong Province, China) were analyzed. The purely substance-specific methods for endotoxin elimination only (Toraymyxin®, Alteco®) were not considered. RESULTS: A comprehensive analysis of these criteria reveals that there are considerable differences between the various available technologies in terms of materials used, adsorption characteristics, application, and available data on safety and clinical experience. Furthermore, it becomes clear that not only the efficacy of blood purification technologies should be considered in terms of an effect–price–performance ratio, but that in particular the safety of the individual technologies is of crucial importance. DISCUSSION: Among the technologies analyzed, CytoSorb currently represents the most investigated and clinically established procedure. Furthermore, it should be noted that clinical results, but particularly safety-relevant aspects, are not transferable between the products due to technically different procedures. Springer Medizin 2020-06-24 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC8159789/ /pubmed/32583037 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00063-020-00702-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access. Dieser Artikel wird unter der Creative Commons Namensnennung 4.0 International Lizenz veröffentlicht, welche die Nutzung, Vervielfältigung, Bearbeitung, Verbreitung und Wiedergabe in jeglichem Medium und Format erlaubt, sofern Sie den/die ursprünglichen Autor(en) und die Quelle ordnungsgemäß nennen, einen Link zur Creative Commons Lizenz beifügen und angeben, ob Änderungen vorgenommen wurden. Die in diesem Artikel enthaltenen Bilder und sonstiges Drittmaterial unterliegen ebenfalls der genannten Creative Commons Lizenz, sofern sich aus der Abbildungslegende nichts anderes ergibt. Sofern das betreffende Material nicht unter der genannten Creative Commons Lizenz steht und die betreffende Handlung nicht nach gesetzlichen Vorschriften erlaubt ist, ist für die oben aufgeführten Weiterverwendungen des Materials die Einwilligung des jeweiligen Rechteinhabers einzuholen. Weitere Details zur Lizenz entnehmen Sie bitte der Lizenzinformation auf http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.de (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Übersichten
Krenn, C. G.
Steltzer, H.
Hämoadsorption zur Blutreinigung – Unvergleichbarkeit der klinisch angebotenen Verfahren
title Hämoadsorption zur Blutreinigung – Unvergleichbarkeit der klinisch angebotenen Verfahren
title_full Hämoadsorption zur Blutreinigung – Unvergleichbarkeit der klinisch angebotenen Verfahren
title_fullStr Hämoadsorption zur Blutreinigung – Unvergleichbarkeit der klinisch angebotenen Verfahren
title_full_unstemmed Hämoadsorption zur Blutreinigung – Unvergleichbarkeit der klinisch angebotenen Verfahren
title_short Hämoadsorption zur Blutreinigung – Unvergleichbarkeit der klinisch angebotenen Verfahren
title_sort hämoadsorption zur blutreinigung – unvergleichbarkeit der klinisch angebotenen verfahren
topic Übersichten
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8159789/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32583037
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00063-020-00702-2
work_keys_str_mv AT krenncg hamoadsorptionzurblutreinigungunvergleichbarkeitderklinischangebotenenverfahren
AT steltzerh hamoadsorptionzurblutreinigungunvergleichbarkeitderklinischangebotenenverfahren