STUDIES ON HELP APHERESIS FOR LONG COVID & RELATED STUDIES

Below you will find the latest studies regarding H.E.L.P. Apheresis for Long Covid for download.

The largest study to date, a register study is currently undertaken by the European arm of the ISFA (International Society for Apheresis) - the E-ISFA and is expected to be published by the end of 2023: ISFA Register Study

If you are looking for success rates/reports for H.E.L.P. Apheresis for Long Covid and Post-Vac, we have collected available public sources here

For studies on other forms of apheresis please scroll further down here

Apheresis for Long Covid - various forms of Apheresis used

Why does H.E.L.P. Apheresis work better than other forms of apheresis when treating Long Covid

An explanation attempt on why H.E.L.P. Apheresis has shown the by far best results in treating Long Covid and Post-Vac of all forms of apheresis plus some links to the science behind it. Spoiler alert: It could all be because H.E.L.P. Apheresis is one of the only highly selective apheresis forms that uses heparin precipitation, a form of highly selective adsorption/precipitation - you will find a comparison chart of all forms of apheresis here

For those that want to go into the details, here we go:

Two of the main problems at the core of Long Covid are the severely affected microcirculation and coagulation issues – the existing studies and clinical evidence give a clear picture. The official documentation regarding indications of Help Apheresis, including treatment of microcirculation issues, is available here: Link

The H.E.L.P. Apheresis system is the only apheresis system on the market that is specifically designed to target the coagulation process. It also supports the fibrinolysis by removing fibrinogen at 68,6% efficiency (Study: Buuren_2012, Zanetti_2014, Mellwig_2003, Mellwig_2006). This explains why it is more efficient than other apheresis system on the market when coagulation issues need to be treated. H.E.L.P. as well increases microcirculation in the blood vessels by 20% (see studies quoted further below) and has no counterindication for ACE-inhibitors (which is a big problem with all other apheresis systems that use cascaded systems or full blood systems, explanation below*) plus it has a very high tolerability with low side effects, approximately twice better than other apheresis systems on the market.

H.E.L.P. Apheresis does at its core what all apheresis systems do – cleaning the blood from pathogens and inflammation. But it does that at highest rates with lowest side effects – one treatment removes approx. 64% of pathogens because of the unique lipid precipitation system. (Study: Moriarty_2001, Zanetti_2014). In H.E.L.P. solving coagulation and fibrinolysis issues and boosting the microcirculation is combined with the extra corporal and intensified - through lowered pH value of the blood plasma - use of heparin. Heparin binds to SarsCov2 spike glycoprotein: The binding of heparin to spike glycoprotein inhibits SARS-CoV-2 infection by three mechanisms - ScienceDirect

*ACE-inhibitor problems with other apheresis systems: • Apheresis procedures have contraindications with ACE inhibitors. The reason is the negative charges within the process technology. The only exception is lipid precipitation (H.E.L.P.). In the H.E.L.P. process there are no negatively charged process components. Why do contraindications occur with other apheresis procedures? • ACE inhibitors inhibit ACE (angiotensin converting enzyme). The result is that the blood pressure drops. • But ACE has a second effect. Inhibition of the degradation of bradykinin. • When blood comes into contact with negative surfaces, bradykinin is released. • If the patients take ACE inhibitors, the concentration of bradykinin in the blood becomes too high, vessels become dilated and permeable. Consequence: Circulatory collapse and high risk for the patient!

HELP Apheresis has almost 40 years of clinical experience and over 600,000 documented treatments (200,000 of which are scientifically documented), this is one of the best study situations there is. Studies of all apheresis procedures show a side effect rate of 7.7% of (Study: 2015_Dittrich_Riediger). For HELP this reduces to only 4.6% (2003_Schuff Werner, a very large study with 58,991 HELP apheresis). The high tolerance of HELP is also proven in the following studies (Study: Heigl_2015, Buuren_2012, Dittrich-Riediger_2015). Potential adverse effects such as circulation, low blood sugar, allergic reaction are part of the nurses training and can in almost all cases be handled without a doctor. There are no known cases of severe sideeffects during or after HELP Apheresis. From the over 600.000 treatments there is no case reported where there were any irreversible side effects occurring.

STUDIES ON IMMUNOADSORPTION AND INUSPHERESIS FOR LONG COVID

In this study Immunoapheresis has not shown results in Long Covid / Post Vac Syndrom: Immune adsorption for the treatment of fatigue-dominant long-/post-COVID syndrome (29.03.2023) (aerzteblatt.de) However, anecdotally treating doctors and patients have reported success rates of roughly 30% initially which are decreasing to 10% after 5-6 weeks (and require repeated treatment). Immunoapheresis seems to be indicated only for patients where microcirculation issues are not at the core of their illness, but altered autoantibody levels.

In this study published by alternative healers/practitioners and doctors of the commercial Inuspheresis company itself, they claim Inuspheresis has a success rate of 74%: Clinical improvement of Long-COVID is associated with reduction in autoantibodies, lipids, and inflammation following therapeutic apheresis . Our community reporting system has not recorded the same data on Inuspheresis. Our data shows many reports of permanent worsening after the Inus treatment as it might be too invasive due to being completely unselective. WARNING - use at your own risk!