4.2 Article

Complications of apheresis in children

期刊

TRANSFUSION
卷 47, 期 10, 页码 1837-1842

出版社

BLACKWELL PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.1111/j.1537-2995.2007.01405.x

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND: Although the frequency of complications in adults undergoing therapeutic apheresis is low, there are little data in children. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A retrospective study of 186 children who had undergone a total of 1632 apheresis procedures between 1994 and 2002 was conducted. Adverse reactions were prospectively documented. The procedures were plasma exchange (67%), hematopoietic progenitor cell collection (18%), red blood cell exchange (6.9%), leukodepletion (0.7%), and plasma exchange with immunoadsorption (6.7%). RESULTS: Adverse reactions, most minor, were reported in 55 percent of procedures in 82 percent of patients. The most frequent complications, per procedure and per patient during an entire course of therapy, were hypotension (14 and 48.4%), hypotension requiring fluid bolus (4.8 and 26.9%), symptomatic hypocalcemia (9.7 and 28.5%), allergic reactions (4.4 and 5.9%), catheter-related thrombosis (1.7 and 12.4%), catheter-related infection (2.1 and 16.1%), and severe anemia (hemoglobin [Hb] level, < 7 g/dL; 2.5 and 17.2%). There were two deaths (1% of patients). Risk factors for complications by multivariate analysis were lower body weight, lower preapheresis Hb level, apheresis in a critical care unit, and number of procedures per patient. The 55 percent incidence of complications per procedure in our pediatric cohort is much higher than the 4.3 to 28 percent incidence reported in adults. The excess of adverse reactions in children are mostly related to citrate toxicity, higher relative vascular volume shifts, and the need for vascular access. CONCLUSION: Pediatric apheresis presents unique challenges and is associated with higher complication rate compared to adults. It is recommended that this procedure be performed in specialized centers.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据