Abstract
Two techniques for plasmapheresis are used in the treatment of myasthenia gravis (MG): immunoadsorption (IA) and double filtration (DF). This controlled study evaluated the differences between these techniques in clinical effects and serological changes. Five patients with generalized MG (clinical states IIb and III) were enrolled; each patient received IA and DF plasmapheresis on separate occasions. Immunosorba TR-350 with an affinity to acetylcholine receptor antibodies (AchRAb) was used for IA, while Evaflux 4A was used as the plasma fractionator for DF. Each course of treatment consisted of five sessions of apheresis. MG score, titers of AchRAb, immunoglobulins (Ig), and plasma biochemistry were assessed by blinded examiners before and immediately after the entire course of treatment. Both treatments effectively ameliorated symptoms of MG. There were no significant changes in MG score between the two groups (IA vs. DF: 2.2 vs. 2.6, P> 0.5). IA had a higher clearance rate of AchRAb than DF (66 % vs. 54 %, P< 0.05), while DF removed more IgA (72% vs. 21%, P< 0.05) and IgM (89% vs. 57%, P< 0.01) than did IA. Although IA removed AchRAb more effectively than DF, the clinical effects between these two treatments were similar. The titers of AchRAb cannot reflect the clinical severity. Some circulating factors other than AchRAb may contribute to the pathogenesis of MG.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
