Search

Background: In 2012, the German Lipoprotein Apheresis Registry (GLAR) was launched. Real-world data on lipoprotein apheresis (LA) treatment are now available for a time period of 11 years. All patients received the maximally tolerated lipid-lowering therapy, which included statins, ezetimibe, bempedoic acid, and either proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) antibodies or antisense therapy., Methods and Results: During the time period from 2012 to 2022, 92 German apheresis centers collected retrospective and prospective observational data of a total of 2,301 patients undergoing regular lipoprotein apheresis (LA) treatment of hypercholesterolemia or/and Lp(a)-hyperlipoproteinemia suffering from progressive atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), with complete data sets of 1.125 patients, who were the subject of this analysis. More than 61,500 LA sessions are documented in the database. In 2022, all patients treated with LA demonstrated a significant immediate median reduction rate of LDL-C (68.8 %) and Lp(a) (72.9 %). Patient data were analyzed for the incidence rate of major coronary events (MACE) 1 and 2 years before the beginning of LA treatment (y-2 and y-1) and prospectively up to eleven years on LA treatment (y+1 to y+11). During the first two years of LA treatment (y+1 and y+2), a MACE reduction of 73 % was observed and continued to be low during y+3 to y+11, when all LA patients were analyzed. LA patients with only increased Lp(a) levels (Lp(a) ≥ 60 mg/dl (≥120 nmol/l) and an LDL-C < 100 mg/dl (<2.6 mmol/l)) had a higher MACE reduction (85 %; n = 443) in the first two years of LA treatment compared to LA patients with only increased LDL-C-levels (LDL-C ≥ 100 mg/dl (≥2.6 mmol/l); Lp(a) < 60 mg/dl (<120 nmol/l)) (53 %; n = 171). Adverse events of LA remained low (about 5 %) over the eleven years and mainly represented puncture problems (1.0 %). No side effects resulted in termination of LA therapy., Conclusions: The current analysis of GLAR data indicates that regular LA leads to very low incidence rates of cardiovascular events in patients with high LDL-C and/or high Lp(a) levels, progressive ASCVD, and maximally tolerated lipid-lowering medication, including proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibition. Additionally, LA was safe with a low rate of adverse effects over an 11-year period. The number of enrolled patients and the duration of observation establish GLAR as the largest LA registry worldwide., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: The knowledge on the prevalence of elevated lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)), patients' characteristics, and nongenetic risk factors is scarce in some regions including Poland, the largest Central and Eastern European country. Thus, we aimed to present the results from the Lp(a) registry established in Poland's 2nd largest, supra-regional hospital - the Polish Mother's Memorial Hospital Research Institute (PMMHRI)., Methods: The PMMHRI-Lp(a)-Registry was established in January 2022. Since that time all consecutive patients of the Departments of Cardiology, Endocrinology, and outpatient cardiology, diabetology and metabolic clinics have been included. The indications for Lp(a) measurement in the registry are based on the 2021 Polish Lipid Guidelines and new Polish recommendations on the management of elevated Lp(a) (2024). Lp(a) was determined using Sentinel's Lp(a) Ultra, an Immunoturbidimetric quantitative test (Sentinel, Milan, Italy), and the results are presented in mg/dL., Results: 511 patients were included in the registry between Jan 2022 and 15th May 2024. The mean age of patients was 48.21 years. Female patients represented 53.42 % of the population. Elevated Lp(a) levels above 30 and 50 mg/dL were detected in 142 (27.79 %), and 101 (19.8 %) patients, respectively. The mean Lp(a) level was 30.45 ± 42.50 mg/dL, with no significant sex differences [mean for men: 28.80 mg/dL; women: 31.89 mg/dL]. There were also no significant differences between those with and without: coronary artery disease (CAD), dyslipidemia, stroke, heart failure, cancer, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, and thyroid disease. The significant Lp(a) level difference was observed in those with a history of myocardial infarction (MI) vs those without (51.47 ± 55.16 vs 28.09 ± 37.51 mg/dL, p < 0.001). However, when we divided those with premature vs no premature MI, no significant difference in Lp(a) level was observed (51.43 ± 57.82 vs 51.52 ± 53.18 mg/dL, p = 0.95). Lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) at baseline did not significantly affect Lp(a) level, with only significant differences for the highest doses of rosuvastatin (p < 0.05) and in those treated with ezetimibe (as a part of the combination therapy; 44.73 ± 54.94 vs 26.84 ± 37.11 mg/dL, p < 0.001). For selected patients (n = 43; 8.42 %) with at least two Lp(a) measurements (mean time distance: 7 ± 5 months, range 1-20 months) we did not observe statistically significant visit-to-visit variability (mean difference: 3.25 mg/dL; r = 0.079, p = 0.616). While dividing the whole population into those with Lp(a) ≤30 mg/dL and > 30 mg/dL, the only hyper-Lp(a)-emia prevalence differences were seen for FH diagnosis (12.88 vs 21.43; p = 0.017), MI prevalence (6.52 vs 16.90 %; p < 0.001), thyroid disease diagnosis (18.14 vs 26.76 %; p = 0.033) and ezetimibe treatment (18.58 vs 30.77 %, p = 0.036). A similar pattern was observed while dividing the whole population on those with Lp(a) ≤50 mg/dL (125 nmol/L) and > 50 mg/dL (125 nmol/L) except for no statistical difference for thyroid disease., Conclusions: These results strongly emphasize that Lp(a) should be measured commonly, as its high level is highly prevalent (even every 3rd patient) in patients at cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk in primary and secondary prevention, requiring risk re-stratification and optimization of the treatment. This is especially important in the regions that characterize baseline high CVD risk, which refers to most CEE countries, including Poland., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Dr Lewek has received a speaker's fee from Amgen, Novartis, Sanofi; Dr. Banach has received research grant(s)/support from Amgen, Daiichi Sankyo, Sanofi and Viatris, and has served as a consultant/received speaker's fee for Amgen, Daiichi-Sankyo, Esperion, Kogen, KRKA, Menarini, MSD, Mylan/Viatris, Novartis, Novo-Nordisk, Polpharma, Sanofi, Servier, Teva, and Zentiva; all other authors have nothing to declare in relation to the results of this paper., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: none declared.

Purpose of Review: Familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) and hyperlipoproteinemia(a) are relatively common disorders, posing a significant health burden due to increased risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Development of electronic health record-based strategies with a linkage to the genetic test results has increased awareness, detection, and control of heritable lipid disorders. This review attempts to critically examine available data to provide a summary of the current evidence for lipoprotein apheresis in FH and elevated lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a))., Review Findings: Availability and indications for lipoprotein apheresis vary across the globe. On average, greater than 60% of atherogenic apoB-containing lipoproteins are immediately reduced following a single procedure, translating in substantial reduction of incident ASCVD events, and preventing accelerated vascular aging. Simultaneous lipid-lowering therapy targeting low-density lipoprotein (LDL) and Lp(a) enhances the efficacy of lipoprotein apheresis. Lipoprotein apheresis alters the proteomics of the lipoprotein particles, including reduction in the concentration of the oxidized-LDL and Lp(a) particles, and proinflammatory apoE bound to HDL particles and remnant lipoproteins. Other effects attributed to lipoprotein apheresis include improvement in blood rheology, endothelial function, microvascular flow, myocardial perfusion, reduction in circulating inflammatory markers. Development of lipoprotein apheresis registries provides data on benefits, challenges, and barriers to inform pertinent healthcare policies. Lipoprotein apheresis is a safe and effective procedure for lowering cholesterol in patients with combined and isolated FH and elevated Lp(a). It reduces the burden of ASCVD and improves long-term prognosis. A team approach is required by the patient, medical staff, and healthcare provider to initiate and maintain a lipoprotein apheresis program., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Methods: Three hundred thirty-nine patients (230 men, 109 women) treated with lipoprotein apheresis in Saxony, Germany, in 2018 are described in terms of age, lipid pattern, risk factors, cardiovascular events, medication, and number of new admissions since 2014, and the data are compared with figures from 2010 to 2013., Results: Patients were treated by 45.5 physicians in 16 lipoprotein apheresis centers. With about 10 patients per 100 000 inhabitants, the number of patients treated with lipoprotein apheresis in Saxony is twice as high as in Germany as a whole. The median treatment time was 3 years. Almost all patients had hypertension; type 2 diabetes mellitus was seen significantly more often in patients with low Lipoprotein(a). Cardiovascular events occurred in almost all patients before initiation of lipoprotein apheresis, under apheresis therapy the cardiovascular events rate was very low in this high-risk group. For some cardiovascular regions even no events could be observed., Conclusions: The importance of lipoprotein apheresis in Saxony had been increasing from 2010 to 2018., (© 2022 The Authors. Therapeutic Apheresis and Dialysis published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of International Society for Apheresis and Japanese Society for Apheresis.)

Importance: Lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]) is an important risk factor for atherothrombotic cardiovascular disease and aortic stenosis, for which there are no treatments approved by regulatory authorities., Objectives: To assess adverse events and tolerability of a short interfering RNA (siRNA) designed to reduce hepatic production of apolipoprotein(a) and to assess associated changes in plasma concentrations of Lp(a) at different doses., Design, Setting, and Participants: A single ascending dose study of SLN360, an siRNA targeting apolipoprotein(a) synthesis conducted at 5 clinical research unit sites located in the US, United Kingdom, and Australia. The study enrolled adults with Lp(a) plasma concentrations of 150 nmol/L or greater at screening and no known clinically overt cardiovascular disease. Participants were enrolled between November 18, 2020, and July 21, 2021, with last follow-up on December 29, 2021., Interventions: Participants were randomized to receive placebo (n = 8) or single doses of SLN360 at 30 mg (n = 6), 100 mg (n = 6), 300 mg (n = 6), or 600 mg (n = 6), administered subcutaneously., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was evaluation of safety and tolerability. Secondary outcomes included change in plasma concentrations of Lp(a) to a maximum follow-up of 150 days., Results: Among 32 participants who were randomized and received the study intervention (mean age, 50 [SD, 13.5] years; 17 women [53%]), 32 (100%) completed the trial. One participant experienced 2 serious adverse event episodes: admission to the hospital for headache following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and later for complications of cholecystitis, both of which were judged to be unrelated to study drug. Median baseline Lp(a) concentrations were as follows: placebo, 238 (IQR, 203-308) nmol/L; 30-mg SLN360, 171 (IQR, 142-219) nmol/L; 100-mg SLN360, 217 (IQR, 202-274) nmol/L; 300-mg SLN360, 285 (IQR, 195-338) nmol/L; and 600-mg SLN360, 231 (IQR, 179-276) nmol/L. Maximal median changes in Lp(a) were -20 (IQR, -61 to 3) nmol/L, -89 (IQR, -119 to -61) nmol/L, -185 (IQR, -226 to -163) nmol/L, -268 (IQR, -292 to -189) nmol/L, and -227 (IQR, -270 to -174) nmol/L, with maximal median percentage changes of -10% (IQR, -16% to 1%), -46% (IQR, -64% to -40%), -86% (IQR, -92% to -82%), -96% (IQR, -98% to -89%), and -98% (IQR, -98% to -97%), for the placebo group and the 30-mg, 100-mg, 300-mg, and 600-mg SLN360 groups, respectively. The duration of Lp(a) lowering was dose dependent, persisting for at least 150 days after administration., Conclusions and Relevance: In this phase 1 study of 32 participants with elevated Lp(a) levels and no known cardiovascular disease, the siRNA SLN360 was well tolerated, and a dose-dependent lowering of plasma Lp(a) concentrations was observed. The findings support further study to determine the safety and efficacy of this siRNA., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04606602; EudraCT Identifier: 2020-002471-35.

Background: Lipoprotein apheresis (LA) is a safe method of reducing atherogenic lipoproteins and improving cardiovascular (CV) outcomes. We aimed to assess the reductions in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] levels in patients undergoing regular LA therapy and to evaluate its influence on the incidence rate of adverse cardiac and vascular events (ACVE) and major adverse cardiac events (MACE)., Methods: A longitudinal study in Poland evaluated the prospective and retrospective observational data of 23 patients with hyperlipoproteinaemia (a) [hyper-Lp(a)] and familial hypercholesterolemia (FH), undergoing 1014 LA sessions between 2013 and 2020. Their pre- and post-apheresis LDL-C and Lp(a) levels were assessed to calculate the acute percent reductions. The time period used to evaluate annual rates of ACVE and MACE before and after initiation of LA was matched in each patient., Results: The pre-apheresis LDL-C and Lp(a) concentrations were 155 (107-228) (mg/dL) (median and interquartile range) and 0.56 (0.14-1.37) (g/L), respectively. LA therapy resulted in a reduction of LDL-C to 50 (30-73.5) (mg/dL) and of Lp(a) to 0.13 (0.05-0.34) (g/L), representing a percent reduction of 70.0% and 72.7% for LDL-C and Lp(a), respectively. We found a significant reduction in the annual rate of ACVE (0.365[0.0-0.585] vs (0.0[0.0-0.265]; P = .047) and MACE (0.365[0.0-0.585] vs 0.0[0.0-0.265]; P = .031)., Conclusions: The findings of our study indicate that LA treatment in patients with hyperlipoproteinaemia (a) and FH on maximally tolerated lipid lowering therapies leads to a substantial reduction in LDL-C and Lp(a) concentrations and lowers CV event rates in Polish patients., (© 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Purpose of Review: Summarize recent recommendations on clinical management of adults and youth with elevated lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] who are at-risk of or affected by cardiovascular disease (CVD)., Recent Findings: There is ample evidence to support elevated Lp(a) levels, present in approximately 20% of the general population, as a causal, independent risk factor for CVD and its role as a significant risk enhancer. Several guidelines and position statements have been published to assist in the identification, treatment and follow-up of adults with elevated levels of Lp(a). There is growing interest in Lp(a) screening and strategies to improve health behaviors starting in youth, although published recommendations for this population are limited. In addition to the well established increased risk of myocardial infarction, stroke and valvular aortic stenosis, data from the coronavirus pandemic suggest adults with elevated Lp(a) may have a particularly high-risk of cardiovascular complications. Lp(a)-specific-lowering therapies are currently in development. Despite their inability to lower Lp(a), use of statins have been shown to improve outcomes in primary and secondary prevention., Summary: Considerable differences exist amongst published guidelines for adults on the use of Lp(a) in clinical practice, and recommendations for youth are limited. With increasing knowledge of Lp(a)'s role in CVD, including recent observations of COVID-19-related risk of cardiovascular complications, more harmonized and comprehensive guidelines for Lp(a) in clinical practice are required. This will facilitate clinical decision-making and help define best practices for identification and management of elevated Lp(a) in adults and youth., (Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] has risen to the level of an accepted cardiovascular disease risk factor, but final proof of causality awaits a randomized trial of Lp(a) lowering. Inhibiting apolipoprotein(a) production in the hepatocyte with ribonucleic acid therapeutics has emerged as an elegant and effective solution to reduce plasma Lp(a) levels. Phase 2 clinical trials have shown that the antisense oligonucleotide pelacarsen reduced mean Lp(a) levels by 80%, allowing 98% of subjects to reach on-treatment levels of <125 nmol/l (∼50 mg/dl). The phase 3 Lp(a)HORIZON (Assessing the Impact of Lipoprotein(a) Lowering With TQJ230 on Major Cardiovascular Events in Patients With CVD) outcomes trial is currently enrolling approximately 7,680 patients with history of myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, and symptomatic peripheral arterial disease and controlled low-density lipoprotein cholesterol to pelacarsen versus placebo. The co-primary endpoints are major adverse cardiovascular events in subjects with Lp(a) >70 mg/dl and >90 mg/dl, in which either of the two being positive will lead to a successful trial. Additional ribonucleic acid-targeted therapies to lower Lp(a) are in preclinical and clinical development. The testing of the Lp(a) hypothesis will provide proof whether Lp(a)-mediated risk can be abolished by potent Lp(a) lowering., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Dr.Tsimikas has received research support from the Fondation Leducq and partial support from National Institutes of Health grants HL136275, HL106579, HL108735, HL136098, HL128550, and HL135737. Dr. Tsimikas is an employee of the University of California-San Diego and of Ionis Pharmaceuticals; is a co-inventor and receives royalties from patents owned by the University of California San Diego on diagnostic and therapeutic applications; and is a co-founder and has an equity interest in Oxitope and its affiliates (“Oxitope”) as well as in Kleanthi Diagnostics (“Kleanthi”) (although these relationships have been identified for conflict-of-interest management based on the overall scope of the project and its potential benefit to Oxitope and Kleanthi, the research findings included in this particular publication may not necessarily relate to the interests of Oxitope and Kleanthi; the terms of this arrangement have been reviewed and approved by the University of California San Diego in accordance with its conflict-of-interest policies). Dr. Moriarty has served as an advisor, consultant, and received research support from Regeneron, Sanofi, Amgen, Esperion, Kaneka, Amarin, Stage II Innovations/Renew, Novartis, Ionis, Akcea, FH Foundation, GB Life Sciences, Aegerion, Gemphire, and Pfizer. Dr. Stroes has received fees paid to his institution from Amgen, Akcea, Athera, Sanofi-Regeneron, Esperion, Novo Nordisk, Lily, and Novartis., (Copyright © 2021 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose of Review: High lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) level is an independent cardiovascular risk factor with higher prevalence among patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). The actual problem is that most currently available lipid-lowering drugs are unable to abolish Lp(a) pathogenicity. Lipoprotein apheresis (LA) is an effective method for elimination of atherogenic lipoproteins, but it is approved only in some countries for treatment of elevated Lp(a) level in the presence of progressive ASCVD. In recent years, new studies on LA were published and the purpose of this review is to present the information on optimal management of Lp(a) hyperlipoproteinemia by LA in the modern era., Recent Findings: Most clinical studies designed to treat Lp(a) hyperlipoproteinemia with different LA systems are small in size but demonstrate that the elimination of Lp(a) from bloodstream leads to reduction of inflammatory and prothrombotic process in a few months and to atherosclerotic plaques regression in 1.5 years. Treatment with LA for 2 to 5 years in terms of clinical trials and in real-world setting provides further evidence that Lp(a) reduction by 60-80% is associated with proportional decreasing of rate and risk of cardiovascular events. Specific Lp(a) apheresis is the only possible method that solely targets Lp(a). In most countries, non-specific LA is used for treatment Lp(a) hyperlipoproteinemia in very high-risk subjects with progressive ASCVD. PCSK9 inhibitors have only modest effect on significantly elevated Lp(a), whereas large population-based studies requested sustained and prolonged reduction of Lp(a) levels by 50-100 mg/dL to gain proportional decreasing of major adverse cardiovascular events.

The emergence of pathophysiological, epidemiologic, and genetic data strongly supports the causality for lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] in cardiovascular disease (CVD) and calcific aortic valve disease (CAVD). In parallel, novel Lp(a) lowering approaches have been developed that have re-invigorated clinical interest in Lp(a). Because Lp(a) is the most prevalent monogenetic lipid disorder globally, with prevalence of Lp(a) > 50 mg/dL estimated at >1.4 billion people, the rationale for diagnosing and managing Lp(a)-mediated risk is now stronger than ever. Patients with elevated Lp(a) are significantly under-diagnosed and the diagnosis is frequently made ad hoc rather than systematically. Elevated Lp(a) levels are associated with atherothrombotic risk and patients present with varied clinical phenotypes, ranging from stroke in pediatric age groups, to ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction in young males, to CAVD in elderly individuals. A new clinical care paradigm of a dedicated "Lp(a) Clinic" would serve to evaluate and manage such patients who have elevated Lp(a) as the pathophysiological etiology. Such a clinic would include multidisciplinary expertise in lipid metabolism, clinical cardiology, vascular medicine, valvular disease, thrombosis, and pediatric aspects of clinical care. This viewpoint argues for the rationale of an Lp(a) outpatient clinic where patients with elevated Lp(a) and their affected relatives can be referred, evaluated, managed and followed, to ultimately reduce Lp(a)-mediated CVD and CAVD risk., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest ST is a co-inventor, receives royalties from patents owned by the University of California San Diego on oxidation-specific antibodies, is a co-founder of Oxitope, Inc and Kleanthi Diagnostics and currently has a dual appointment at UCSD and as an employee of Ionis Pharmaceuticals. ESGS is a consultant for Akcea Therapeutics, Amgen, Sanofi, Esperion, and has received research grants from Sanofi., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background: Lipoprotein apheresis (LA) is a well-established therapy for lowering lipid levels in serious cases of dyslipidaemia, including high levels of lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)]. This method lowers both LDL cholesterol and Lp(a) by more than 60% in most of patients; however, because randomized clinical studies could be extremely difficult, also other markers of the effect of this procedures on vascular health are of importance. Therefore, in addition to changes in plasma lipids and Lp(a) during LA, we also analysed the response of biomarkers associated with vascular integrity: small non-coding microRNAs (miRNAs)., Materials and Methods: We analysed the changes in miRNAs in two women (age 70 and 72 years) with clinically manifest extensive and progressive atherosclerotic disease and high levels of Lp(a) and with different clinical course who were treated by LA. In both women we analysed changes of 175 circulating plasma miRNAs using pre-defined serum/plasma focus panels at the beginning of and one year after the therapy., Results: In addition to reduced levels of plasma lipids and Lp(a), circulating plasma levels of miR-193a-5p; -215-5p; -328-3p; -130a-3p; -362-3p; -92b-3p decreased, and levels of miR-125a-5p; -185-5p; -106a-5p; -320b; -19a increased (all P < 0.05) in both women. Moderate differences were found between both women with regard to the different course of atherosclerotic disease., Conclusions: Long-term LA substantially changes circulating plasma miRNAs associated with vascular integrity reflected different clinical course in both women. If confirmed, this approach could improve the assessment of the effectiveness of this therapy on an individual basis., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Although lipid-lowering drugs, especially statins, and recently also PCSK9 inhibitors can reduce LDL cholesterol (LDL-C) and decrease the risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD) including coronary artery disease (CAD) events most efficiently, only 5-10% of high-risk cardiovascular patients reach the target values recommended by international guidelines. In patients who cannot be treated adequately by drugs it is possible to reduce increased LDL-C and/or lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) values by the use of lipoprotein apheresis (LA) with the potential to decrease severe CVD events in the range of 70%->80%. Even in Germany, a country with well-established reimbursement guidelines for LA, knowledge about this life-saving therapy is unsatisfactory in medical disciplines treating patients with CVD. Starting in 1996 our aim was to offer LA treatment following current guidelines for all patients in the entire region of our clinic as standard of care., Methods: Based on the experience of our large apheresis competence center overlooking now nearly 80,000 LA treatments in the last two decades, we depict the necessary structure for identification of patients, defining indication, referral, implementation and standardisation of therapy as well as for reimbursement. LA is unfamiliar for most patients and even for many practitioners and consultants. Therefore nephrologists performing more than 90% of LA in Germany have to form a network for referral and ongoing medical education, comprising all regional care-givers, general practitioners as well as the respective specialists and insurances or other cost bearing parties for offering a scientifically approved therapeutic regimen and comprehensive care. The German Lipid Association (Lipid-Liga) has implemented the certification of a lipidological competence center as an appropriate way to realize such a network structure., Results: Working as a lipidological and apheresis competence center in a region of 400,000 to 500,000 inhabitants, today we treat 160 patients in the chronic LA program. In spite of the availability of PCSK9 inhibitors since 2015, LA has remained as an indispensable therapeutic option for targeted lipid lowering treatment. An analysis of nearly 37,000 LA treatments in our own center documented a >80% reduction of cardiovascular events in patients treated by regular LA when comparing with the situation before the start of the LA therapy. We have implemented the concept of an apheresis competence center characterised by ongoing medical education with a focus on lipidological and cardiovascular aspects, interdisciplinary networking and referral., Conclusions: Incidence and prevalence of LA patients in our region demonstrate that based on our ongoing patient-centered approach the access of patients in need to LA is substantially above the German average, thus contributing to an extraordinary reduction of cardiovascular events in the population we in particular feel responsible for., (Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background: Lipoprotein (Lp-) apheresis is a life-long therapy, usually performed in weekly intervals. In some cases, however, atherosclerotic disease progresses despite adequate therapy with weekly Lp-apheresis and maximal lipid lowering medication. In an attempt to improve the effectiveness of therapy, we temporarily shortened treatment intervals of Lp-apheresis in patients with elevated lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) and further progression of coronary atherosclerosis despite weekly Lp-apheresis and maximal lipid lowering medication., Methods: We illustrate three case reports of patients with elevated Lp(a), who underwent regular weekly Lp-apheresis treatment for secondary prevention. The intensified treatment protocol contained three therapies in two weeks (alternating 2 per week and 1 per week)., Results: The shortening of treatment intervals achieved a stabilization of atherosclerotic disease in case 1. After a total of 68 therapies in 52 weeks (1.31 sessions/week) the elective coronary angiography revealed excellent long-term results. In case 2, the intensified treatment protocol is still ongoing. The patient reported a decrease in angina pectoris and an increase in exercise capacity since the beginning of more frequent therapy sessions. In some cases, as it is shown in case 3, a fast decision for shortening the treatment intervals is necessary., Conclusions: The intensified treatment regimen resulted in an improvement in clinical symptoms and no further progression of atherosclerosis. In conclusion, shorter therapeutic Lp-apheresis intervals, at least temporarily, should be considered in patients who suffer from clinical and/or angiographic progression of atherosclerosis, despite maximal lipid lowering medication and weekly Lp-apheresis., (Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

An elevation of lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is an internationally recognized atherogenic risk factor, documented in epidemiological studies, in studies with Mendelian randomization and in genome-wide association studies (GWAS). At present, no drug is available to effectively reduce its concentration. In Germany, an elevation of Lp(a) associated with progressive cardiovascular diseases is officially recognized as an indication for a lipoprotein apheresis (LA). The number of patients who were treated with LA with this abnormality was steadily increasing in the years 2013-2016 - the official data are reported. In all new patients, who started to be treated at our LA center in 2017 (n = 20) the increased Lp(a) was a main indication for extracorporeal therapy, though some of them also showed clearly elevated LDL cholesterol (LDL-C) concentrations despite being treated with a maximal tolerated lipid-lowering drug therapy. A diabetes mellitus was seen in 5 patients. The higher was the Lp(a) level before the first LA session, the higher was the cardiovascular risk. Lp(a) concentrations measured before LA sessions were usually about 20% lower than those before the start of the LA therapy. Acutely, Lp(a) levels were reduced by about 70%. Following LA sessions the Lp(a) levels increased and in the majority reach pre-session concentrations after one week. Thus a weekly interval is best for the patients, but a few may need two sessions per week to stop the progress of atherosclerosis. The interval mean values were about 39% lower than previous levels. Several papers had been published showing a higher efficiency of LA therapy on the incidence of cardiovascular events in patients with high Lp(a) values when comparing with hypercholesterolemic patients with normal Lp(a) concentrations. Russian specific anti-Lp(a) columns positively affected coronary atherosclerosis. PCSK9 inhibitors reduce Lp(a) concentrations in many patients and in this way have a positive impact on cardiovascular outcomes. In the future, an antisense oligonucleotide against apolipoprotein(a) may be an alternative therapeutic option, provided a clear-cut reduction of cardiovascular events will be demonstrated., (Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background: In Austria, about 12 patients per 1 million inhabitants are treated currently with lipoprotein (LP-) apheresis. In 2016 it has been suggested, that about 5000 patients were treated worldwide with LP-apheresis, more than half of them in Germany. Regular LP-apheresis aims to decrease apolipoprotein B-rich lipoproteins and to reduce cardiovascular events. In this analysis we present the current situation of LP-apheresis in Austria and we evaluated the cardiovascular event rate 2 years before versus 2 years after starting LP-apheresis., Methods: A retrospective analysis of 30 patients (19 men and 11 women) was performed at Athos Institute, Vienna, Austria. The study period included two years prior versus two years after the beginning of LP-apheresis. Cardiovascular events and interventions were defined as regarding the coronary (MACE) or the non-coronary (peripheral, cerebral or renal) vascular system., Results: The first cardiovascular event before treatment initiation occurred at a mean age of 48.4 years (range 34-73), treatment was started at a mean age of 55.6 years (range 34-73). The mean rate of incidence of cardiovascular events per patient per 2 years before beginning of LP-apheresis (y-2 and y-1) versus 2 years during treatment (y+1 and y+2) was reduced by 77.78% (1.50 versus 0.33 events/patient/2 years, p = 0.003)., Conclusions: The significant reduction in MACE and vascular disease during regular LP-apheresis at weekly intervals is consistent with data from the literature. Difficulties arise in comparing such studies due to different definition of events or interventions and different study durations. However, LP-apheresis is an efficient treatment option and causes significantly prolonged event-free survival for patients at risk., (Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background: Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) are established causal risk factors for cardiovascular disease (CVD). Lipoprotein apheresis is often required for treatment of patients with a high risk for CVD due to hypercholesterolemia and/or hyperlipoproteinemia(a)., Aim: To describe our experience with lipoprotein apheresis in patients with severe hypercholesterolemia or with hyperlipoproteinemia(a)., Methods: We retrospectively investigated patients treated with Lipoprotein apheresis using direct adsorption of lipoproteins (DALI) technique, between December 2008 and March 2018, in our center. Adverse events, acute and long term reductions in lipid parameters were analyzed., Results: Between December 2008 and March 2018, a total of 950 treatments were performed in five patients, four with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (HeFH), all on maximally tolerated cholesterol-lowering drug therapy and in one patient with hyperlipoproteinemia(a) and progressive CVD. In the four patients with HeFH we obtained mean acute reductions in LDL-C and non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C) of 62.0 ± 7.8% and 60.4 ± 6.8%, respectively. Regarding long-term efficacy we achieved a mean reduction of 43.1% in LDL-C and of 41.2% in non-HDL-C. In the patient with hyperlipoproteinemia(a) we attained mean acute reductions of 60.4 ± 6.4% in Lp(a) and of 75.4 ± 7.3% in LDL-C per session and long term reductions in Lp(a) and LDL-C of 67.4% and 40.5%, respectively. Adverse events were recorded in only 1.2% of treatments., Conclusion: Lipoprotein apheresis is an efficient and safe treatment in severely hypercholesterolemic patients who are refractory to conservative lipid-lowering therapy or with hyperlipoproteinemia(a) and progressive CVD., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Therapeutic apheresis is a term used to describe a group of treatments where blood components are separated in real time, and one component is removed, exchanged, and/or treated to remove pathogenic substances from the circulation. Plasma exchange, which removed all plasma components, and lipid apheresis which selectively removes lipoproteins from circulation, have both been used to treat atherosclerotic vascular diseases., Methods: To review the literature regarding the application of therapeutic apheresis for atherosclerotic vascular diseases., Results: Primarily lipid apheresis is used to treat atherosclerotic vascular diseases, particularly familial hypercholesterolemia, lipoprotein (a) hyperlipoproteinemia and peripheral vascular diseases. Lipid apheresis can be used as first line or second line treatment with a strong evidenced-based recommendation. Its use has decreased atherosclerotic events., Conclusion: Lipid apheresis is an important therapy for the treatment of familial hypercholesterolemia, lipoprotein (a) hyperlipoproteinemia and peripheral vascular diseases. Lipid apheresis does more than remove low-density lipoproteins and other lipoproteins but also decreases inflammatory markers and improves blood flow.

Objective: To evaluate the association of lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] level with short- and long-term outcomes after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and to assess the effect of a 12 month course of weekly lipoprotein apheresis on vein graft patency and coronary atherosclerosis course in post-CABG patients with hyperlipidemia., Methods: This study was performed in patients after successful CABG and consisted of three parts: a) a retrospective part with computed tomography assessment of vein graft patency in patients with first-year recurrence of chest pain after CABG (n = 102); b) a prospective trial with evaluation of cardiovascular outcomes during follow up time up to 15 years in relation to baseline Lp(a) levels (n = 356); c) an 12-months interventional controlled study in 50 patients with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels >2.6 mmol/L prior to the operation despite statin treatment that allocated into 2 groups: active (n = 25, weekly apheresis by cascade plasma filtration (CPF) plus atorvastatin), and control (n = 25, atorvastatin alone)., Results: Patients subjected to computed tomography were divided in two groups: 66 (65%) with at least one vein graft occlusion and 36 (35%) without occlusions. Lp(a) levels were significantly higher in patients with occluded grafts with a median (95% confidence intervals (CI)) of 24 (17-42) mg/dL vs. 12 (6-24) mg/dL in patients with patent grafts, p < 0.01. Over a mean of 8.5 ± 3.5 years (range 0.9-15.0 years), the primary and secondary endpoints were registered in 46 (13%) and 107 (30%) patients, respectively. Patients with Lp(a) ≥30 mg/dL were at significantly greater risk for the primary endpoint (hazard ratio (HR) 2.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.76-5.03, p < 0.001) and secondary endpoint (HR 3.47, 95%CI 2.48-4.85, p < 0.001) than patients with Lp(a) values <30 mg/dL. During the CPF procedure LDL-C levels decreased by 59 ± 14%, Lp(a) levels by 49 ± 15. The frequency of vein graft occlusions at study end was 14.3% (11 of 77) in the apheresis group and 27.4% (23 of 84) in the control group, p < 0.05. Progression of atherosclerosis was obtained in 26 (14.2%) segments of native coronary arteries in the apheresis group and in 50 (25.0%) segments of the control group. Regression signs were found in 30 (16.4%) and 19 (9.5%) segments, stabilization in 127 (69.4%) and 131 (65.5%) segments, respectively (χ 2  = 9.37, p < 0.01). A Lp(a) level higher than 30 mg/dL was associated with a three-fold increased risk of vein grafts occlusion during first year after CABG, p < 0.001., Conclusion: Our data suggest that elevated Lp(a) is associated with a significantly increasing rate of one-year vein graft occlusions and adverse long-term cardiovascular outcomes whereas the use of lipoprotein apheresis improves vein graft patency during the first year after CABG., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aims: Dyslipidaemias are associated with cardiovascular mortality and morbidity, driven by unstable atherosclerotic plaques with inflammatory infiltrates. Levels of messenger RNA (mRNA) for pro-inflammatory cytokines have been positively correlated with atherosclerotic disease progression. Therapeutic lipoprotein apheresis (LA) reduces plasma lipid levels and reduces inflammation. We evaluated the effects of LA on expression of mRNA coding for key pro-inflammatory cytokines in patients with dyslipidaemia, homo-/hetero-zygous familial hypercholesterolaemia (HoFH, HeFH) or hyperlipoprotein(a)aemia [hyperLp(a)] and associated coronary artery disease (CAD)., Approach: Ten patients (five males and five females, mean age 47 ± 9.2 years) were enrolled, all with HyperLp(a) or confirmed genetic diagnoses of dyslipidaemia, HoFH, or HeFH; all had associated CAD. mRNA determinations were via reverse transcriptase polymer chain reaction (RT-qPCR)., Results: LA was associated with downregulation of mRNA expression for IL-1α, IL-6 and TNF-α, starting after the first LA session. The observed reduction was progressively enhanced during the interval between the first and second LA sessions to achieve a maximum decrease by the end of the second session (IL-1α: -49%, p < 0.001; IL-6: -35%, p < 0.001; TNF-α: -56%, p < 0.001)., Conclusions: LA suppresses the expression of IL-1α, IL-6 and TNF-α mRNA in patients with dyslipidaemias. This may contribute to the arterial anti-inflammatory effect of LA., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Elevated plasma levels of lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)], referred to as lipoprotein(a)-hyperlipoproteinemia [Lp(a)-HLP], are an independent risk factor for atherosclerosis. Lipoprotein apheresis (LA) enables an effective reduction of Lp(a) plasma levels. The present study investigates the effects of LA in patients with Lp(a)-HLP and peripheral artery disease (PAD)., Methods: Ten patients with isolated Lp(a)-HLP and severe PAD and who had recently undergone a revascularization (index procedure) were prospectively included in this observational single center study. All patients received weekly LA. Ankle-brachial-index (ABI), transcutaneous partial oxygen pressure (tcpO 2 ), pain level, and walking distance were assessed at baseline and at the follow ups scheduled 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months after initiation of LA. The number of revascularizations within 12 months prior and within 24 months after the index procedure was determined., Results: As early as 1 month after initiation of LA, all investigated parameters had improved significantly compared to baseline. This improvement was further substantiated under LA throughout the entire follow-up period. Comparing baseline results with the 24-month follow-up, the average ABI increased from 0.53 ± 0.15 to 0.97 ± 0.08 (P < 0.001). The mean tcpO 2 also increased from 42.9 ± 2.3 mmHg to 61 ± 4.6 mmHg (P < 0.001). The improved perfusion led to a reduction of the mean pain level from 7.0 ± 1.5 to 1.1 ± 0.4 (P < 0.001) on a visual analogue scale (VAS) and an extension of the mean walking distance from 87 ± 60 m to 402 ± 119 m (P < 0.001). All patients suffered from severe PAD with a high number of revascularizations in the 12 months prior to the index procedure (35 procedures in 120 patient-months). Since initiation of LA, the number of revascularizations dropped significantly and remained very low during the entire follow-up period (2 procedures in 229 patient-months, P < 0.001)., Conclusion: In patients with Lp(a)-HLP and severe PAD, LA results in sustained improvement of circulation, pain level and walking distance. The number of repeat revascularizations is strongly reduced under LA treatment., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Lipoprotein apheresis has been shown to improve the cardiovascular outcome in patients with atherosclerotic disease and therapy-refractory hypercholesterolemia or elevated lipoprotein (a) (Lp(a)). An elevated intake of omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids such as eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) has also been associated with a reduced cardiovascular risk. However, until now only little is known about the effect of apheresis treatment on the levels of omega-6 and omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (n-6 PUFA and n-3 PUFA) in patients. Using gas chromatography (GC) the present study analyzed the content of n-6 and n-3 PUFA as well as saturated fatty acids and monounsaturated fatty acids in the plasma of 20 patients with hyperlipidemia undergoing regular lipoprotein apheresis procedures in direct pre- and post-therapy measurements. Lipoprotein apheresis uniformly reduced the concentrations of arachidonic acid (AA), EPA and DHA fatty acids analyzed in the plasma. However, the three different apheresis methods analyzed (heparin precipitation, membrane filtration and direct absorption) had different effects on the fatty acid profile in the plasma. We found that heparin precipitation and direct absorption apheresis procedures led to a significant decrease of plasma n-3 and n-6 PUFA by 40-50%. In contrast, patients undergoing membrane filtration apheresis, levels pre- and post-apheresis did not change significantly, with AA and EPA being only reduced by approximately 10% while levels of DHA were maintained pre- and post-apheresis. In contrast, total triglyceride levels were lowered most potently by membrane filtration apheresis. In summary, heparin precipitation and direct absorption apheresis approaches significantly lowered polyunsaturated fatty acids in plasma, while membrane filtration did not. This might have implications for cardiovascular and inflammatory risk/benefit profiles associated with n-6 and n-3 PUFA levels in the body., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Lipoprotein apheresis (LA) represents the only effective therapeutic option for patients with elevated Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) levels. We aimed at analyzing the Lp(a) reduction, rebound rates as well as mean interval values between two weekly apheresis sessions, since this might be important for the prediction of the residual cardiovascular risk and development of individualized approaches for this special therapeutic strategy., Materials and Methods: 20 patients under weekly and 2 patients under twice weekly apheresis were included. We measured serum concentrations of Lp(a), total, LDL-, HDL - cholesterol and triglycerides daily over 7 days after single LA sessions., Results: Mean Lp(a) levels was 158.1 ± 69.82 nmol/l before the LA session, decreased acutely by 76 ± 7% and increased to 97 ± 13% of the baseline value within 7 days in patients under weekly treatment. By mathematical modeling, the acute Lp(a) reduction can be calculated from the function: y (nmol/l) = 3.415 + 0.738 * x (R 2  = 0.970), where x is the baseline Lp(a) value. The recovery rate can be predicted from the equation: y (%) = 22.49 + 18.64 * x - 1.14 * x 2 (R 2  = 0.874), where x is the day after apheresis. The empirical formula for the mean interval value is: y (nmol/l) = x - 12, where x is the absolute reduction in nmol/l., Conclusion: We modeled - for the first time - equations to predict the course of Lp(a) serum levels under weekly LA which are simple, reliable and enable the development of optimal individualized protocols of this costly lipid lowering therapy., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is an independent cardiovascular (CV) risk factor, predisposing to premature and progressive CV events. Lipoproteinapheresis (LA) is the only efficacious therapy for reducing Lp(a). Data comparing the clinical efficacy of LA with respect to reduction of CV events in subjects with elevated Lp(a) versus LDL-C versus both disorders is scarce. We aimed to perform this comparison in a multicenter observational study., Methods: 113 LA patients from 8 apheresis centers were included (mean age 56.3 years). They were divided into 3 groups: Group I: Lp(a) < 600 mg/l, LDL-C > 2.6 mmol/l, Group II: Lp(a) > 600 mg/l, LDL-C < 2.6 mmol/l, and Group III: Lp(a) > 600 mg/l, LDL-C > 2.6 mmol/l. CV events were documented 2 years before versus 2 years after LA start., Results: Before start of LA Group II showed the highest CV event rate (p 0.001). Group III had a higher CV event rate than Group I (p 0.03). During LA there was a significant reduction of CV events/patient in all vessel beds (1.22 ± 1.16 versus 0.33 ± 0.75, p < 0.001). The highest CV event rate during LA was seen in coronaries followed by peripheral arteries, cerebrovascular events were least common. Greater CV event reduction rates were achieved in patients with isolated Lp(a) elevation (-77%, p < 0.001) and in patients with Lp(a) and LDL-C elevation (-74%, p < 0.001) than in subjects with isolated hypercholesterolemia (-53%, p 0.06)., Conclusion: This study demonstrates that patients with Lp(a) elevation benefit most from LA treatment. Prospective trials to confirm these data are warranted., (Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background: Dyslipidemia is a well-known risk factor for atherosclerosis and subsequent cardiovascular disease (CVD). While low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) is well-established and taken into consideration for risk management and therapy, lipoprotein(a) is another established CVD risk factor frequently not undergoing screening due to a lack of medical treatment options. For patients suffering from CVD due to massive elevation of Lp(a) in presence of normal LDL-C levels, lipoprotein apheresis is the only available treatment option. While this constellation is an accepted indication for lipoprotein apheresis (LA) in Germany, prospective studies including a control group are still lacking., Objective: Primary objective of this trial is to evaluate the clinical benefit of lipoprotein apheresis on myocardial infarction, PCI, CABG and death from cardiovascular disease in subjects with elevated Lp(a). This study evaluates the clinical benefit of weekly LA in subjects with progressive cardiovascular disease, as accepted by the German Federal Joint Committee (treatment group). Comparator will be well-matched subjects under maximum tolerated lipid lowering therapy without access to LA treatment (control group)., Methods: MultiSELECt, is a prospective, multicenter, multinational, two-arm matched-pair cohort study designed to directly compare subjects with significantly elevated Lp(a) approved for LA subsequently undergoing weekly apheresis treatment versus a continuation of maximal medical therapy. The follow-up period will be 2 years after the baseline visit and until at least 60 events of the primary end-point occurred in the control group. A central trial expert committee will review all subjects with respect to their potential indication for LA according to established German guidelines in a blinded fashion. All control subjects will be contacted monthly via telephone visits to compensate for the more frequent visits during apheresis. Approximately 150 matched pairs will be necessary to detect an event reduction of at least 10% in subjects under LA treatment., Conclusion: The MultiSELECt trial provides the unique opportunity to demonstrate the efficiency of LA on CVD in patients with elevated Lp(a) under strongly controlled conditions., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

High concentrations of lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) represent an important independent and causal risk factor associated with adverse outcome in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (CVD). Effective Lp(a) lowering drug treatment is not available. Lipoprotein apheresis (LA) has been proven to prevent cardiovascular events in patients with Lp(a)-hyperlipoproteinemia (Lp(a)-HLP) and progressive CVD. Here we present the course of a male patient with established peripheral arterial occlusive disease (PAOD) at the early age of 41 and coronary artery disease (CAD), who during follow-up developed over 2 years a progressive syndrome of cerebellar and spinal cord deficits against the background of multifactorial cardiovascular risk including positive family history of CVD. Spastic tetraplegia and dependency on wheel chair and nursing care represented the nadir of neurological deficits. All conventional risk factors including LDL-cholesterol had already been treated and after exclusion of other causes, genetically determined Lp(a)-HLP was considered as the major underlying etiologic factor of ischemic vascular disease in this patient including spinal cord ischemia with vascular myelopathy. Treatment with an intensive regimen of chronic LA over 4.5 years now was successful to stabilize PAOD and CAD and led to very impressive neurologic and overall physical rehabilitation and improvement of quality of life.Measurement of Lp(a) concentration must be recommended to assess individual cardiovascular risk. Extracorporeal clearance of Lp(a) by LA should be considered as treatment option for select patients with progressive Lp(a)-associated ischemic syndromes.

Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is an independent cardiovascular risk factor playing a causal role for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (CVD). Lipoprotein apheresis (LA) is a safe well-tolerated outpatient treatment to lower LDL-C and Lp(a) by 60-70%, and is the ultimate escalating therapeutic option in patients with hyperlipoproteinemias (HLP) involving LDL particles. Major therapeutic effect of LA is preventing cardiovascular events. Lp(a)-HLP associated with progressive CVD has been approved as indication for regular LA in Germany since 2008. The Pro(a)LiFe-study investigated with a prospective multicenter design the long-term preventive effect of LA on incidence rates of cardiovascular events prospectively over a period of 5 years in 170 consecutive patients who commenced regular LA. During a median period of 4.7 years of the pre-LA period, Lp(a) associated progressive CVD became apparent. Apolipoprotein(a) (apo(a)) isoforms and polymorphisms at the apo(a) gene (LPA) were analyzed to assess hypothetical clinical correlations. 154 patients (90.6%) completed 5‑years follow-up. Significant decline of the mean annual major adverse cardiac event (MACE) rate was observed from 0.41 ± 0.45 two years prior to regular LA to 0.06 ± 0.11 during 5 years with regular LA (p < 0.0001). 95.3% of patients expressed at least one small apo(a) isoform. Calculation of isoform specific concentrations allowed to confirm the equivalence of 60 mg/dl or 120 nmol/l as Lp(a) thresholds of the German LA guideline. Results of 5 years prospective follow-up confirmed that LA has a lasting effect on prevention of cardiovascular events in patients with Lp(a)-HLP and afore progressive CVD.

General lipoprotein (Lp) (a) screening can help to identify patients at high risk for cardiovascular disease. Non-invasive methods allow early detection of clinically asymptomatic incipient atherosclerotic disease. Medical treatment options are still unsatisfactory. Lp(a) apheresis is an established treatment in Germany for secondary prevention of progressive cardiovascular disease. Statin-based lowering of LDL cholesterol and thrombocyte aggregation inhibitors still represent the basis of medical treatment. Target levels for LDL-cholesterol should be modified in patients with hyperlipoproteinemia (a).

Lipoprotein (a) (Lp (a)) is one risk factor for the development of cardiovascular diseases. Several studies have shown that Lp (a) hyperlipoproteinaemia has a particular influence on the development of coronary heart disease (CHD). A retrospective single-centre observation study was performed to evaluate the effectiveness of lipid apheresis on the basis of consecutively performed percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) in patients with high Lp (a) values and angiographically documented CHD.In 23 pts (male 18, age 60.04 ± 0.58 years) with angiographically documented CHD (first manifestation 48.00 ± 9.41 years), elevated LDL cholesterol (144.39 ± 92.01 mg/dl) and Lp (a) (133.04 ± 39.68 mg/dl), 49 PCI and 3 coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) procedures had been performed prior to the initiation of lipid apheresis. Following the initiation of weekly lipid apheresis, LDL cholesterol was 99.43 ± 36.53 mg/dl and Lp (a) 91.13 ± 33.02 mg/dl. In a time interval of 59.87 ± 49.49 months (median 51.00, range 1-153 months) 15 pts did not require an additional PCI. In 8 pts (7 pts 3‑vessel disease, 1 pt 2‑vessel disease) 14 PCI - no CABG - were performed after 69.38 ± 71.67 months (median: 32.50, range 17-232 months). The incidence of PCI could thus be reduced by 71.43%.

Background: Since 2005 an interdisciplinary German apheresis working group has been established by members of both German Societies of Nephrology and of Lipidologists and completed the data set for the registry according to the current guidelines and the German indication guideline for apheresis in 2009. In 2011 the German Lipoprotein Apheresis Registry (GLAR) was launched and data are available over nearly 5 years now., Methods and Results: During the time period 2012-2016, 71 German apheresis centers collected retrospective and prospective observational data of 1435 patients undergoing lipoprotein apheresis (LA) treatment of high LDL-C levels and/or high Lp (a) levels suffering from cardiovascular disease (CVD) or progressive CVD. A total of 15,527 completely documented LA treatments were entered into the database. All patients treated by LA showed a median LDL-C reduction rate of 67.5%, and a median Lp (a) reduction rate of 71.1%. Analog to the Pro(a)LiFe pattern, patient data were analyzed to the incidence rate of coronary events (MACE) 1 and 2 years before the beginning of LA treatment (y-2 and y‑1) and prospectively two years on LA treatment (y + 1 and y + 2). During two years of LA treatment a MACE reduction of 78% was observed. In the years considered, side effects of LA treatment were low (5.9%) and mainly comprised puncture problems., Conclusions: The data generated by the GLAR shows that LA lowers the incidence rate of cardiovascular events in patients with high LDL-C and/or high Lp (a) levels, progressive CVD, and maximally tolerated lipid lowering medication. In addition, LA treatments were found to be safe with a low rate of side effects.

A high level of lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is recognized as an independent and additional cardiovascular risk factor contributing to the risk of early onset and progressive course of cardiovascular disease (CVD). All lipid lowering medications in use mainly lower low density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-c) with no or limited effect on levels of Lp(a). Niacin, the only component lowering Lp(a), is firstly often poorly tolerated and secondly not available anymore in many countries. A level of <50 mg/dl was recommended recently as the cut off level for clinical use and decision making. Since lipoprotein apheresis (LA) lowers not only LDL-c but also Lp(a) significantly, its use is recommended in some countries in very high-risk patients with early or progressive CVD. Retrospective analyses show that regular LA improves the course of CVD. This is supported by a recent prospective observational trial and data of the German Lipoprotein Apheresis Registry. Despite many treatment options, all too often it is not possible to reduce LDL-c levels to target and to reduce Lp(a) levels sustainably at all. Therefore, new drug therapies are awaited. Some of the lipid modifying drugs in development lower Lp(a) to some extent in addition to LDL-c; the only specific approach is the apoprotein(a) antisense oligonucleotide. Currently LA is the standard of care as a last resort treatment in high-risk patients with elevated Lp(a) and severe CVD despite optimal control of all other cardiovascular risk factors.

In contrast to existing EAS/ESC guidelines on the management of lipid disorders, current recommendations from nephrological societies are very conservative and restrictive with respect to any escalation of lipid lowering/statin therapy. Furthermore, lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) - an established cardiovascular risk factor - has not even been mentioned. While a number of retrospective and prospective studies suggested that Lp(a) has relevant predictive value and might have - at least in stage-3 chronic kidney disease (CKD) - the same negative effects if draged along in non-CKD patients, there is no guidance on diagnostic or therapeutic procedures. The persistent lack of recognition automatically leads to therapeutic nihilism, which might pose a number of relatively young patients to a significantly increased risk for adverse cardiovascular events. Further evaluation of Lp(a) in CKD is very important to provide appropriate treatment to patients with high Lp(a) levels, even in the presence of CKD.

Objective: Lipoprotein(a)-hyperlipoproteinemia (Lp(a)-HLP) along with progressive cardiovascular disease has been approved as indication for regular lipoprotein apheresis (LA) in Germany since 2008. We aimed to study the long-term preventive effect of LA and to assess hypothetical clinical correlations of apolipoprotein(a) (apo(a)) by analyzing genotypes and phenotypes., Approach and Results: This prospective observational multicenter study included 170 patients with Lp(a)-HLP and progressive cardiovascular disease (48.9 years median age at diagnosis) despite other cardiovascular risk factors, including low-density lipoprotein cholesterol had maximally been treated (mean baseline low-density lipoprotein cholesterol: measured, 2.56 mmol/L [98.9 mg/dL] and corrected, 1.72 mmol/L [66.3 mg/dL]). Patients were prospectively investigated during a 5-year period about annual incidence rates of cardiovascular events. In addition, apo(a) isoforms and polymorphisms at the apo(a) gene (LPA) were characterized. One hundred fifty-four patients (90.6%) completed 5 years of follow-up. Mean Lp(a) concentration before commencing regular LA was 108.1 mg/dL. This was reduced by a single LA treatment by 68.1% on average. Significant decline of the mean annual cardiovascular event rate was observed from 0.58±0.53 2 years before regular LA to 0.11±0.15 thereafter (P<0.0001); 95.3% of patients expressed at least 1 small apo(a) isoform. Small apo(a) isoform (35.2%) carrying phenotypes were not tagged by single-nucleotide polymorphisms rs10455872 or rs3798220., Conclusions: Results of 5 years of prospective follow-up confirm that LA has a lasting effect on prevention of cardiovascular events in patients with Lp(a)-HLP. Patients clinically selected by progressive cardiovascular disease were characterized by a highly frequent expression of small apo(a) isoforms. Only Lp(a) concentration seemed to comprehensively reflect Lp(a)-associated cardiovascular risk, however., (© 2016 American Heart Association, Inc.)

Hyperlipoproteinemia (HLP) is one of the most common metabolic disorder in childhood. We assume that 20 % of children have a disorder of the lipid metabolism. Some HLP are very common in the population, and moderate, and some are very rare, but are very severe. These may occur secondary to pathological conditions, or are formed on the basis of the primary monogenic or polygenic disorders of lipid metabolism. The detection of children with HLP in the Czech Republic is either random, or more often by selective screening of children with familial history of cardiovascular disease, provided by general pediatric practitioners for children and adolescents. Treatment in childhood is primarily dietetic, some of them, especially children with familial hypercholesterolemia are treated from 8-10 years pharmacologically.Key words: diagnosis - hyperlipoproteinemia - children - treatment.

Hyperlipoproteinemia (HLP) and dyslipidemia (DLP) are of course mainly perceived as diseases of common incidence and are typically seen as the greatest risk factors (RF) in the context of the pandemic of cardiovascular diseases. This is certainly true and HLP or DLP overall affect tens of percents of adults. However we cannot overlook the fact that disorders (mostly congenital) of lipid metabolism exist which, though not formally defined as such, amply satisfy the conditions for classification as rare diseases. Our account only includes a brief overview of the rare HLPs based on the dominant disorder of lipid metabolism, i.e. we shall mention the rare primary forms of hypercholesterolemia, primary forms of hypertriglyceridemia and the rare primary combined forms of HLP. In recent years an amazing progress has been reached relating to these diseases, in particular in the area of exact identification of the genetic defect and the mechanism of defect formation, however each of these diseases would require a separate article, though outside the field of clinical internal medicine. Therefore we shall discuss homozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) in greater depth, partially also the "severe" form of heterozygous FH and in the following part the lipoprotein lipase deficiency; that means, diseases which present an extreme and even fatal risk for their carriers at a young age, but on the other hand, new therapeutic possibilities are offered within their treatment. An internist then should be alert to the suspicion that the described diseases may be involved, know about their main symptoms, where to refer the patient and how to treat them. Also dysbetalipoproteinemia (or type III HLP) will be briefly mentioned. Homozygous FH occurs with the frequency of 1 : 1 000 000 (maybe even more frequently, 1 : 160 000), it is characterized by severe isolated hypercholesterolemia (overall cholesterol typically equal to 15 mmol/l or more), xanthomatosis and first of all by a very early manifestation of a cardiovascular disease. Myocardial infarction is not an exception even in childhood. The therapy is based on high-dose statins, statins in combination with ezetimib and now also newly on PCSK9 inhibitors. Lomitapid and partly also mipomersen hold great promise for patients. LDL apheresis then represents an aggressive form of treatment. Lipoprotein lipase deficiency (type I HLP) is mainly characterized by severe hypertriglyceridemia, serum milky in colour, and xanthomatosis. A fatal complication is acute recurrent pancreatitis. A critical part of the treatment is diet, however it alone is not enough to control a genetic disorder. The only approved treatment is gene therapy. Experimentally, as an "off label" therapy, it is used in case studies with a lomitapid effect. We have our own experience with this experimental therapy. Dysbetalipoproteinemia is a congenital disorder of lipoprotein metabolism, characterized by high cholesterol (CH) and triglyceride (TG) levels. The underlying cause of this disease is the defect of the gene providing for apolipoprotein E. It is clinically manifested by xanthomatosis, however primarily by an early manifestation of atherosclerosis (rather peripheral than coronary).Key words: Lipoprotein lipase deficiency - dysbetalipoproteinemia - familial hypercholesterolemia - gene therapy - homozygous FH - LDL apheresis - lomitapid - mipomersen - PCSK9 inhibitors - rare diseases.

Objectives: Elevated levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] are known risk factors for atherosclerosis and cardiovascular events. Although lipoprotein apheresis (LA) yields optimal outcomes for patients suffering from progressive cardiovascular disease (CVD; coronary, peripheral, and cerebrovascular arterial disease) in the presence of hyperlipoproteinemia (LDL-C > 100 mg/dL or Lp(a) > 60 mg/dL), LA primarily serves as a "last-resort therapy". Extant findings show that the incidence of new cardiovascular events can be reduced by regular LA. However, it remains unclear whether improvements to the quality of life (QOL) improvement produced by the positive impact on the course of cardiovascular disease outweighs the therapy's time consuming and invasive character. We surveyed 36 patients (32 men and 4 women; age 53 ± 13 years [mean + standard deviation]) undergoing regular LA therapy to assess the effects of apheresis on QOL., Methods: QOL was evaluated in 29 patients on regular lipoprotein apheresis treatment using the Medical Outcomes Study 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), and a newly developed questionnaire for assessing QOL in patients undergoing LA., Results: Patients treated with LA showed lower QOL scores regarding mental aspects and equal scores regarding physical aspects compared to the general population, analogue to the results of patients on hemodialysis (SF-36). Analysis of BDI scores showed apheresis patients did not meet criteria for depression diagnosis, although their depression scores were higher than the general population. Compared to the pre-apheresis period, patients described an improvement of their physical and mental fitness, less angina pectoris and no treatment related pain were reported (apheresis questionnaire)., Conclusions: Apheresis treatment appears to reduce the subjective physical complaints of patients. The partly impaired mental health in patients undergoing apheresis may be attributed to the underlying severe cardiovascular disease. The procedure itself is generally tolerated without major complaints, suggesting the benefits of apheresis exceed any negative effects on patient QOL., (Copyright © 2016 National Lipid Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Previously we found a highly significant increase of phosphatidylethanolamines (PE) in response to acute lipoprotein apheresis (LA) with whole blood dextran sulfate adsorption (DSA) in contrast to the overall tendency of reduction of lipid metabolites of all lipid classes in post-apheresis plasma. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to analyze long-term modifications of the plasma lipidomic profile in patients with repeated DSA apheresis., Methods: Nine patients weekly treated with DSA were followed for 40 weeks. Pre- and post-apheresis levels of routine lipid parameters and lipidomic profiles of five apheresis sessions were assessed., Results: The main finding of the present study was a progressive increase of pre- and post-apheresis plasma lysophosphatidylcholine (LPC) levels, which doubled in concentration at the end of the 40 week observation period. LPC metabolites which mainly contributed to this increase were LPC 20:4 > 18:0 > 18:1 > 16:0 > 20:3 > 18:2., Conclusion: These data indicate that long-term application of DSA technology may be associated with a continuous increase in LPC levels. Possible pro- or anti-atherogenic consequences should be elucidated in further studies., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Iron deficiency (ID) and iron deficiency anemia (IDA) are common findings in patients undergoing lipoprotein apheresis (LA). Different intravenous (iv) formulations are used to treat ID in LA patients, however guidelines and data on ID/IDA management in LA patients are lacking. We therefore performed a prospective observational multi-center cohort study of ID/IDA in LA patients, comparing two approved i.v. iron formulations, ferric gluconate (FG) and ferric carboxymaltose (FCM)., Methods: Inclusion criteria were a) serum ferritin <100 μg/L or b) serum ferritin <300 μg/L and transferrin saturation <20%. Patients received either FG (62.5 mg weekly) or FCM (500 mg once in ID or up to 1000 mg if IDA was present) i.v. until iron deficiency was resolved. Efficacy and safety were determined by repeated laboratory and clinical assessment. Iron parameters pre and post apheresis were measured to better understand the pathogenesis of ID/IDA in LA patients., Results: 80% of LA patients treated at the three participating centers presented with ID/IDA; 129 patients were included in the study. Serum ferritin and transferrin levels were reduced following apheresis (by 18% (p < 0.0001) and by 13% (p < 0.0001) respectively). Both FG and FCM were effective and well tolerated in the treatment of ID/IDA in LA patients. FCM led to a quicker repletion of iron stores (p < 0.05), while improvement of ID/IDA symptoms was not different. Number and severity of adverse events did not differ between FG and FCM, no severe adverse events occurred., Conclusions: Our results suggest that FG and FCM are equally safe, well-tolerated and effective in treating ID/IDA in LA patients. These data form the basis for follow-up randomized controlled trials to establish clinical guidelines., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: To date, there have been no studies evaluating the effect of isolated lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) lowering therapy on carotid atherosclerosis progression., Methods: We enrolled 30 patients who had coronary heart disease (CHD) verified by angiography, Lp(a) level ≥50 mg/dL, and low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level ≤2.6 mmol/L (100 mg/dL) on chronic statin therapy. Subjects were allocated in a 1:1 ratio to receive apheresis treatment on a weekly basis with immunoadsorption columns ("Lp(a) Lipopak"(®), POCARD Ltd., Russia) added to atorvastatin, or atorvastatin monotherapy. The primary efficacy end-point was the change from baseline in the mean intima-media thickness (IMT) of the common carotid arteries., Results: After one month run-in period with stable atorvastatin dose, LDL-C level was 2.3 ± 0.3 mmol/L and Lp(a) - 105 ± 37 mg/dL. As a result of acute effect of specific Lp(a) apheresis procedures, Lp(a) level decreased by an average of 73 ± 12% to a mean of 29 ± 16 mg/dL, and mean LDL-C decreased by 17 ± 3% to a mean of 1.8 ± 0.2 mmol/L. In the apheresis group, changes in carotid IMT at 9 and 18 months from baseline were -0.03 ± 0.09 mm (p = 0.05) and -0.07 ± 0.15 mm (p = 0.01), respectively. In the atorvastatin group no significant changes in lipid and lipoprotein parameters as well as in carotid IMT were received over 18-month period. Two years after study termination carotid IMT increased by an average of 0.02 ± 0.08 mm in apheresis group and by 0.06 ± 0.10 mm in the control group (p = 0.033)., Conclusion: Isolated extracorporeal Lp(a) elimination over an 18 months period produced regression of carotid intima-media thickness in stable CHD patients with high Lp(a) levels. This effect was maintained for two years after the end of study., Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02133807)., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Lipoprotein apheresis and immunoadsorption methods have a firm place among therapeutic approaches in order to treat disorders of lipoprotein metabolism or anti-body induced diseases. The extracorporeal treatment is associated with adverse effects, we wanted to report the Dresden experience., Methods: In this study we retrospectively analyzed the adverse events of several lipoprotein apheresis and immunoadsorption methods at the Apheresis Center in Dresden (Germany). We carefully looked into all available documents. The first extracorporeal lipoprotein apheresis was performed in 1990 and the first extracorporeal immunoadsorption was executed in 1995. Throughout the 23 years study period, 10 different methods were employed in treating 268 patients for a total of 25,293 treatments., Results: Adverse events of varying severity occurred in 1948 of the treatments (7.7%). We subdivided them into mild (61.3% no treatment was necessary), moderate (37.0% oral medication or infusion was given) and severe (1.7% emergency hospitalization was necessary). Therapy had to be stopped prematurely in 1.5% of the treatments. We compared adverse events profiles among the different methods and evaluated for differences by gender. Females were found to have a significantly higher risk of adverse events than male patients. In males, the rate of adverse events ranged from 3.3% (Liposorber(®) D) to 11% (Therasorb™ Ig); in females the minimum rate was 7.8% (DALI) and the maximum 30% (rheopheresis). Adverse events were evenly distributed between the ages of 30-69, the age range at which most of the therapies were performed. We also found that all methods had a higher rate of adverse events during the first year of treatment. Puncture problems and hypotension were the most common adverse events., Conclusion: It can be stressed that in general the extracorporeal methods used can be regarded as safe., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Lipoprotein apheresis (LA) therapy is effective in eliminating atherogenic lipoproteins and reducing the rate of cardiovascular events (CVE) in patients suffering from severe hypercholesterolemia or increased lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) levels despite maximal tolerated lipid lowering therapy., Methods: We examined the rate of CVE in 116 patients (63% males) with an isolated increase of LDL-cholesterol (LDL-C) (Group 1), an isolated increase of Lp(a) (Group 2), a combined increase of LDL-C and Lp(a) (Group 3) and patients who were referred for LA, but never started (Group 4)., Results: Patients with increased Lp(a) (Groups 2 and 3) showed a higher prevalence of advanced atherosclerotic changes, defined as involvement of 3 or 4 vascular territories, including the abdominal aorta and leg arteries, and an involvement of more coronary vessels compared to patients in group 1. Prior to initiation of LA, on average patients suffered 4.4 (range: 0-14) CVE during a period of 7.2 (range: 0-41) years. Group 1 patients suffered fewer CVE per patient-year compared to the other groups (Group 1: 0.75, Group 2: 1.7, Groups 3 and 4: 1.4). 55-63% of patients applying for LA experienced a CVE within the last year (on average 1.3 CVE per patient in the last year). Among patients referred to LA there is a high rate of intolerance to nicotinic acid (42% of patients in Group 3) and statins (58% of patients in Group 1)., Conclusion: Patients referred to LA represent a high risk population for CVE in all vascular territories. Increased Lp(a) levels cause a higher percentage of patients with advanced atherosclerosis., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

It is widely accepted that elevated levels of lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) are associated with an increased risk for cardiovascular diseases. Several studies have identified Lp(a) as independent cardiovascular risk factor. Consequently, therapeutic concepts are targeting at lowering Lp(a) serum levels. To date, in Europe no pharmaceutical treatment to lower levels of Lp(a) is available. Current developments of pharmaceutical agents like the apolipoprotein-(B-100)-antisense mipomersen, inhibitors of PCSK9 and apolipoprotein-(a)-antisense have shown promising results in lowering Lp(a). Presently, the only available therapy to effectively reduce levels of Lp(a) is regular extracorporeal lipoprotein apheresis. Different apheresis methods show a similar lowering effect of about 60-70 % by a single session. Apart from one small-scale study there has been no randomized, controlled study which could prove that lowering Lp(a) will result in a risk reduction for cardiovascular disease. This review looks into the current scientific evidence of., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Hyperlipoproteinemia(a) [Lp(a)-HLP] is a major risk factor for severe atherosclerosis. The present investigation sought to assess the effect of lipoprotein apheresis (LA) in patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD) and Lp(a)-HLP., Methods: In January 2013, we started a registry for Lp(a)-HLP patients who receive weekly LA in our center. So far, ten patients with severe PAD and isolated Lp(a)-HLP who recently underwent revascularization (index procedure) have been included. Pain level, ankle-brachial-index (ABI), transcutaneous oxygen pressure (tcpO2) and walking distance were determined before, as well as 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after initiation of LA. Furthermore, the mean time interval between revascularizations within the 12 months prior to the index procedure and up to 12 months after the index procedure was assessed., Results: All analyzed parameters significantly improved under LA. When comparing the results before LA with the results after 12 months, the ankle-brachial-index increased from 0.5 ± 0.2 to 0.9 ± 0.1 (P < 0.001). The tcpO2 levels also increased from 42.9 ± 2.3 mmHg to 59.0 ± 8.9 mmHg (P < 0.001). The improved microcirculation was associated with a reduction of the mean pain level from 7.0 ± 1.5 to 2.0 ± 0.8 (P < 0.001) as determined using the visual analog scale. The walking distance increased from 87 ± 60 m to 313 ± 145 m (P < 0.001). Importantly, the frequency of revascularization procedures was strongly decreased under LA. All patients combined underwent 35 revascularizations within the 12 months prior to the index procedure (mean interval between two revascularizations: 104.3 days). Since the index procedure, only one revascularization was necessary within 79 patient-months under LA (mean interval: 2404.5 days, P < 0.001)., Conclusion: LA improves circulation, oxygen supply, level of pain and walking distance in patients with severe PAD and Lp(a)-HLP. The frequency of revascularization procedures is strongly reduced under LA treatment., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

LDL cholesterol (LDL-C) and lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) are main risk factors for cardiovascular disease (CVD). Efficacy, safety, and tolerability of lipoprotein apheresis (LA) were investigated in 36,745 LA treatments of 118 patients with CVD in a retrospective, monocentric study. Indications were severe hypercholesterolemia (n = 83) or isolated Lp(a) hyperlipoproteinemia (n = 35). Average age of patients at start of LA treatment was 58.1 years for males and 62.5 years for females. Medium interval between the first cardiovascular event and LA treatment was 6.4 ± 5.6 years and the average LA treatment period was 6.8 ± 4.9 years. On average treatments were performed once a week, via peripheral venous access in 79.3% of non-hemodialysis patients. In patients with hypercholesterolemia initial pre-LA LDL-C was lowered from 176.4 ± 67.0 mg/dL by 66.7 ± 10.8% per session, achieving a long-term interval mean value of 119.8 ± 34.7 mg/dL, i.e. reduction by 32.1 ± 19.6% (p < 0.0001). In patients with isolated elevated Lp(a) initial pre-LA Lp(a) was lowered from 127.2 ± 67.3 mg/dL by 66.8 ± 5.8% per session, achieving a long-term interval mean value of 60.0 ± 19.5 mg/dL, i.e. reduction by 52.8 ± 23.0% (p < 0.0001). After start of LA the average annual rate of major adverse coronary events (MACE) of all patients declined by 79.7% (p < 0.0001). Subgroup analysis showed decline by 73.7% (p < 0.0001) in patients with severe hypercholesterolemia, and by 90.4% (p < 0.0001) in patients with isolated elevated Lp(a). Adverse events (AE) occurred in 1.1% of treatments. LA treatment of patients with high risk for CVD due to LDL and/or Lp(a) hyperlipoproteinemia was effective, safe, and well tolerated. The number of cardiovascular events, at least during a six-year period, declined by 80%., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Lipoprotein apheresis (LA) can lower LDL-cholesterol and Lp(a) by 60%-70% and is the final escalating option in patients with hyperlipoproteinemias involving LDL or Lp(a) particles. Major therapeutic effect of LA is preventing cardiovascular events. In Germany since 2008 a reimbursement guideline has been implemented accepting to establish the indication for LA not only for familial or severe forms of hypercholesterolemia but also based on Lp(a)-hyperlipoproteinemia associated with a progressive course of cardiovascular disease, that persists despite effective treatment of other concomitant cardiovascular risk factors. The Pro(a)LiFe-study confirmed with a prospective multicenter design that LA can be regarded as an important therapeutic approach to effectively reduce Lp(a) plasma levels and prevent cardiovascular events in this particular high-risk patient group. Results support that Lp(a) may be a major causal factor for precipitating mechanisms of accelerated progression of cardiovascular disease (CVD). Indication for LA based on measurement of Lp(a) as part of risk assessment is supported by the following conditions: progressive CVD as assessed clinically and with imaging techniques, established maximally tolerated lipid lowering drug treatment, recent cardiovascular events despite efficient drug treatment, out of the ordinary frequency of cardiovascular events, early CVD, or positive family history of early CVD. Still existing difficulties with Lp(a) laboratory measurement require a practical approach to establish the indication for LA considering the 60 mg/dl threshold of German guidelines with selecting an Lp(a) assay which has been calibrated for mass., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objective: In recent years the Federal Joint Committee (G-BA), a paramount decision-making body of the German health care system challenged the approval of diagnostic and therapeutic procedures for regular reimbursement, including lipoprotein apheresis therapy. Years before an interdisciplinary German apheresis working group, established by members of both German Societies of Nephrology (Verband Deutsche Nierenzentren (VDN), Deutsche Gesellschaft für Nephrologie (DGfN)), initiated a revision of the indication of lipoprotein apheresis therapy according to current guidelines and recommendations for the treatment of lipid disorders. This working group was convinced, that data derived from a registry would support lipoprotein apheresis as a therapy for severe hyperlipidemic patients suffering from progressive cardiovascular diseases., Methods and Results: In 2009 the working group established the indication for lipoprotein apheresis with respect to current cardiovascular guidelines and scientific knowledge for the registry, which are in line with the reimbursement guidelines. In 2011 financing by sponsors was secured and an internet-based registry was created. A pilot project with 5 apheresis centers finished in 2012 - since then the registry is available to all German apheresis centers., Conclusions: There has been consensus between the medical societies and health care carriers regarding the need for a German Lipoprotein Apheresis Registry (GLAR). The launch of this registry complies with requirements of the Federal Joint Committee (G-BA). Complementing the Pro(a)LiFe-Study, first data from GLAR support the safety of the different apheresis treatment procedures. In addition these first data suggest, with respect to the results of Pro(a)LiFe-Study, effectiveness in preventing cardiovascular progression as well. Here, further data are needed to statistically substantiate these early findings., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)