ReviewDeutsche medizinische Wochenschrift (1946)2023
[State of the art: lipoprotein apheresis].
Review in Deutsche medizinische Wochenschrift (1946), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- The influence of lipoprotein(a) on aortic valve calcification in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2025Article
- Candidate SNP Markers Significantly Altering the Affinity of TATA-Binding Protein for the Promoters of Human Hub Genes for Atherogenesis, Atherosclerosis and Atheroprotection.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 7 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Lipoprotein apheresis (LA) is usually a last resort in cardiovascular high-risk patients in the context of secondary prevention after lifestyle measures and maximal pharmacotherapy have failed to prevent the occurrence of new atherosclerotic cardiovascular events (ASCVDE) or to achieve the internationally accepted target values for LDL cholesterol (LDL-C). Patients with homozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (hoFH), in whom myocardial infarctions can occur even in children < 10 years of age without adequate therapy, often owe their survival to LA (used here in primary prevention). Severe hypercholesterolemia (HCH) can often be well controlled with modern potent lipid-lowering agents, including PCSK9 approaches, so that the need for LA has decreased here over the years. In contrast, the number of patients in whom elevation of lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is relevant to atherogenesis is increasing in applications to the apheresis committees of the associations of panel physicians (KV). For this indication, LA is currently the only therapeutic procedure approved by the Federal Joint Committee (G-BA). LA significantly reduces the new occurrence of ASCVDE (comparison with the situation before the start of LA), especially in Lp(a) patients. There are convincing observational studies and a German LA Registry with now 10-year data, but there is no randomized controlled trial. This had been requested by the G-BA in 2008, and a corresponding concept was designed but not accepted by the ethics committee. In addition to the highly effective reduction of atherogenic lipoproteins, many discussed pleiotropic effects of LA itself, the medical rounds and motivating discussions also with the nursing staff, which take place within the weekly LA, certainly contribute to the success of the therapy (steady adjustment of all cardiovascular risk factors, lifestyle measures including smoking cessation, adherence of medication intake). This review article summarizes and discusses the study situation, clinical practical experience as well as the future of LA against the background of the currently rapid development of new pharmacotherapies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.