Retrospective cohort study found plasmapheresis had no impact on in-hospital mortality in patients with pancreatitis, highlighting its cautious use.
The incidence of acute pancreatitis is increasing in the Western world. About 10% of cases are caused by hypertriglyceridemia. Plasmapheresis was shown to reduce serum triglyceride (TG) levels, and current apheresis guidelines recommend its use in severe acute hypertriglyceridemia-induced pancreatitis (HIP). However, data on safety and efficacy are lacking. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy of plasmapheresis in hypertriglyceridemia-induced pancreatitis. This is a retrospective multicenter cohort study of patients hospitalized for an episode of hypertriglyceridemia-induced pancreatitis from January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2022. The predefined composite primary endpoint was in-hospital mortality and organ failure. To reduce allocation bias, we performed propensity score matching. 245 episodes of hypertriglyceridemia-induced pancreatitis from 13 German centers were included. Of those, 95 episodes were treated with plasmapheresis. After propensity score matching, the final cohort consisted of 60 well-balanced pairs. Plasmapheresis was not associated with a difference in the primary composite outcome, in-hospital mortality, and organ failure (8/60 vs. 5/60; χ2(1) = 0.776; p = 0.378), nor was there any difference in the severity of pancreatitis episodes. It showed only a moderate reduction of serum triglyceride compared to the non-plasmapheresis group, but a significantly longer hospital stay in the plasmapheresis group (12 days; IQR 14 vs. 9 days; IQR 11; U = 1356; Z = -2.46; p = 0.014). Plasmapheresis in patients with hypertriglyceridemia-induced pancreatitis was not associated with a better clinical outcome compared with conservative treatment in this propensity score-matched retrospective cohort study. Outside clinical studies, this costly and potentially complicative treatment should be considered with caution.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Staudacher et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: