Hämoperfusion und Plasmapherese auf der Intensivstation: A bridge over troubled water?

In addition to kidney replacement procedures, several other extracorporeal procedures are employed in the intensive care unit. Hemoperfusion with activated charcoal was the predominant treatment used for removal of toxins from the 1970s until the millennium. Nowadays, this treatment does no longer play a clinically meaningful role as even strongly protein-bound toxins can be removed by effective dialysis procedures in case poisoning. The concept of a cytokine adsorber was introduced 10 years ago, which is directed towards withstanding the cytokine storm. Despite negative data from prospective randomized controlled studies, its use is steadily increasing in Germany. A totally different treatment concept is the biomimetic pathogen adsorber, which removes bacteria, viruses and fungi from the bloodstream by binding to immobilized heparin. Whether this rapid reduction of the pathogen load translates into an improvement of clinically relevant endpoints is unclear, as prospective randomized controlled studies are lacking. For the early hours of septic shock a very old procedure, plasmapheresis, has recently regained interest. The results of two large randomized controlled studies in this setting from Europe and Canada will become available in 2025/2026. The rationale to use plasma exchange in early sepsis is that this procedure not only removes cytokines but also replenishes reduced levels of protective factors, such as angiopoietin‑1, a disintegrin and metalloproteinase with a thrombospondin type 1 motif, member 13 (ADAMTS-13) and protein C, if fresh plasma is used as exchange fluid. All afore mentioned procedures do not only have a different mode of action but are also used at seperate time points of bloodstream infections and/or sepsis.