ArticleTherapeutic apheresis and dialysis : official peer-reviewed journal of the International Society for Apheresis, the Japanese Society for Apheresis, the Japanese Society for Dialysis Therapy2026
To analyze the efficacy and safety of plasma exchange in the treatment of anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis.
Article in 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, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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.
- To analyze the efficacy and safety of plasma exchange in the treatment of anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis.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 · 2026Article
- Efficacy and safety of blood purification in the treatment of autoimmune encephalitis: a meta-analysis.American journal of translational research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTo investigate the clinical efficacy and safety of plasma exchange (PE) in the treatment of glucocorticoid-insensitive patients with serum anti-N-methyl-d-aspartate (anti-NMDA) receptor antibody-negative and serum anti-NMDA receptor antibody-positive encephalitis.
methodsThe clinical data of 20 patients with anti-NMDA receptor antibody encephalitis treated between January 2015 and December 2022 were collected. The general information, clinical symptoms, auxiliary examination, treatment (hormone, PE, etc.), adverse reactions, clinical efficacy, and other related data were retrospectively compared and analyzed.
resultsA total of 8 cases had adverse reactions (9.76%, 8/82), including 4 cases (4.88%, 4/82) of allergy and 2 cases (2.44%,2/82) of thrombocytopenia. In patients with anti-NMDA receptor antibody encephalitis who were not sensitive to glucocorticoids, the effective rate of PE was 80.0% (p = 0.0005).
conclusionPE combined with glucocorticoid is more effective than glucocorticoid alone in the treatment of anti-NMDA receptor antibody encephalitis patients with positive or negative anti-NMDA receptor antibodies. Most adverse reactions were mild and easy to manage. It does not cause obvious blood cell loss. PE is a safe and acceptable treatment. However, our study has limitations, and due to the small number of people and the fact that plasmapheresis was performed after glucocorticoid therapy, further prospective clinical studies are warranted.
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.