ArticleJournal of clinical apheresis2025
Hemodynamic Effect of Different Replacement Fluid Protocols During Therapeutic Apheresis Evaluated With CRIT-LINE.
Article in Journal of clinical apheresis, 2025. 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.
- Centrifugal Plasma Exchange Versus Double-Filtration Plasmapheresis in Chronic CIDP: A Randomized Crossover Study Comparing Clinical Outcomes, Biological Effects, Procedure Times, and Costs-The Lymphoapheresis Study.Journal of clinical apheresis · 2026Trial
- Hemodynamic Effect of Different Replacement Fluid Protocols During Therapeutic Apheresis Evaluated With CRIT-LINE.Journal of clinical apheresis · 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In therapeutic apheresis (TA) procedures, it is essential to administrate human albumin solution (HAS) to prevent hypotensive episodes. The CRIT-LINE monitor is used in hemodialysis to estimate changes in relative blood volume (RBV) to prevent such hypotensive episodes. The aim of this study was to evaluate the change in RBV during therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) and double filtration plasmapheresis (DFPP) according to different fluid replacement protocols in order to identify the best protocol. A retrospective case series study was conducted on three patients with CIDP at a tertiary center. Each patient's TA sessions were evaluated with the CRIT-LINE monitor to compare fluid replacement protocols. The following protocols were evaluated for TPE: (TPE1) 100% volume replacement with 4% albumin supplementation; (TPE2) a combination of a 70% volume with 4% albumin and 30% normal saline in the initial phase of the session; and (TPE3) the same combination with normal saline in the final phase of the session. With regard to DFPP, the following protocols were evaluated: DFPP1: continuous infusion of 4% albumin throughout the entire session, and DFPP2: 4% albumin the last 20 min of the session. For the three patients, during the TPE sessions, the nadir for RBV was -10% to -13%, -11% to -17%, and -17% to -20% for TPE1, TPE2, and TPE3 protocols, respectively. Hypotensive episodes were observed in three patients with a combination of fluid replacement with normal saline infused at the end of the session (TPE3). In the DFPP sessions, the nadir for the change in RBV was -7% to -15% and -10% to -20% for DFPP1 and DFPP2 protocols, respectively. The nadir for RBV was higher with albumin infusion at the end of the session. Our results suggest a potentially crucial role of continuous RBV monitoring during TA to identify the better substitution fluid protocol and prevent hypotension during sessions.
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.