4.7 Article

Long-term outcomes in adults with chronic ITP after splenectomy failure

Journal

BLOOD
Volume 104, Issue 4, Pages 956-960

Publisher

AMER SOC HEMATOLOGY
DOI: 10.1182/blood-2003-11-3908

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. NCRR NIH HHS [M01 RR00833] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NHLBI NIH HHS [HL61809] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Adult chronic immune thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) is an autoimmune disorder manifested by thrombocytopenia from the effects of antiplatelet autoantilbodles and T lymphocyte-mediated platelet cytotoxcity. Multiple studies show that corticosteroid treatment and splenectomy, alone or together, increase platelet counts to safe levels in 60% to 70% of patients. However, there is little information on the outcomes of ITP patients refractory to splenectomy. We studied 114 patients with ITP for whom splenectomy failed and who required additional therapy; long-term follow-up was available on 105 (92%) patients. Seventy-five (71.4%) patients attained stable partial (platelet count greater than 30 x 10(9)/L) or complete (normal platelet count) remission; 51 patients remained in remission after therapy was discontinued, whereas 24 patients required continued treatment. Median time to remission after splenectomy failure was 46 months (range, 1-437 months). Median remission durations were 60 months (range, 10-212 months) for patients off therapy and 48 months (range, 2-167 months) for patients on therapy. Thirty (29.6%) patients remained unresponsive to treatment. Thirty-two patients died, 17 (15.7%) of ITP (bleeding, 11 patients; therapy complications, 6 patients) and 15 (13.9%) of unrelated causes. We conclude that most patients with refractory. ITP attain stable remission, though on average this occurs slowly. However, a subpopulation with severe, resistant disease experiences significant morbidity and mortality. (C) 2004 by The American Society of Hematology.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available