• <tr id="yyy80"></tr>
  • <sup id="yyy80"></sup>
  • <tfoot id="yyy80"><noscript id="yyy80"></noscript></tfoot>
  • 99热精品在线国产_美女午夜性视频免费_国产精品国产高清国产av_av欧美777_自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇_亚洲熟女精品中文字幕_www日本黄色视频网_国产精品野战在线观看 ?

    Cytapheresis re-induces high-rate steroid-free remission in patients with steroid-dependent and steroidrefractory ulcerative colitis

    2021-04-17 06:55:32MasahiroIizukaTakeshiEtouYosukeShimodairaTakashiHatakeyamaShihoSagara
    World Journal of Gastroenterology 2021年12期

    Masahiro Iizuka, Takeshi Etou, Yosuke Shimodaira, Takashi Hatakeyama, Shiho Sagara

    Abstract

    BACKGROUND It is a crucial issue for patients with refractory ulcerative colitis (UC), including steroid-dependent and steroid-refractory patients, to achieve and maintain steroid-free remission. However, clinical studies focused on the achievement of steroid-free remission in refractory UC patients are insufficient. Cytapheresis(CAP) is a non-pharmacological extracorporeal therapy that is effective for active UC with fewer adverse effects. This study comprised UC patients treated with CAP and suggested the efficacy of CAP for refractory UC patients.

    AIM To clarify the efficacy of CAP in achieving steroid-free remission in refractory UC patients.

    METHODS We retrospectively reviewed the collected data from 55 patients with refractory UC treated with CAP. We analyzed the following points: (1 ) Efficacy of the first course of CAP; (2 ) Efficacy of the second, third, and fourth courses of CAP in patients who experienced relapses during the observation period; (3 ) Efficacy of CAP in colonic mucosa; and (4 ) Long-term efficacy of CAP. Clinical efficacy was evaluated using Lichtiger’s clinical activity index or Sutherland index (disease activity index). Mucosal healing was evaluated using Mayo endoscopic subscore.Written or oral informed consent was obtained from patients and/or parents of patients aged younger than 20 years.The primary and secondary endpoints were the rate of achievement of steroidfree remission and the rate of sustained steroid-free remission, respectively.Statistical analysis was performed using the paired t-test and chi-squared test.

    RESULTS The rates of clinical remission, steroid-free remission, and poor effectiveness after CAP were 69 .1 %, 45 .5 %, and 30 .9 %, respectively. There were no significant differences in rate of steroid-free remission between patients with steroiddependent and steroid-refractory UC. The mean disease activity index and Lichtiger’s clinical activity index scores were significantly decreased after CAP (P< 0 .0001 ). The rates of steroid-free remission after the second, third, and fourth courses of CAP in patients who achieved steroid-free remission after the first course of CAP were 83 .3 %, 83 .3 %, and 60 %, respectively. Mucosal healing was observed in all patients who achieved steroid-free remission after the first course of CAP. The rates of sustained steroid-free remission were 68 .0 %, 60 .0 %, and 56 .0 % at 12 , 24 , and 36 mo after the CAP. Nine patients (36 %) had maintained steroid-free remission throughout the observation period.

    CONCLUSION Our results suggest that CAP effectively induces and maintains steroid-free remission in refractory UC and re-induces steroid-free remission in patients achieving steroid-free remission after the first course of CAP.

    Conflict-of-interest statement: We declare no conflict-of-interest associated with this manuscript.

    Data sharing statement: No additional data are available.

    Open-Access: This article is an open-access article that was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial (CC BY-NC 4 .0 )license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially,and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: htt p://creativecommons.org/License s/by-nc/4 .0 /

    Manuscript source: Invited manuscript

    Specialty type: Gastroenterology and hepatology

    Country/Territory of origin: Japan

    Peer-review report’s scientific quality classification Grade A (Excellent): 0 Grade B (Very good): 0 Grade C (Good): C, C, C Grade D (Fair): 0 Grade E (Poor): 0

    Received: November 4 , 2020

    Peer-review started: November 4 ,2020

    First decision: January 23 , 2021

    Revised: February 11 , 2021

    Key Words: Ulcerative colitis; Cytapheresis; Steroid-dependent; Steroid-refractory;Steroid-free remission; Inflammatory bowel disease

    INTRODUCTION

    Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a chronic inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) of unknown etiology, which can affect the entire colon. Several treatments for UC are available to induce and maintain the clinical remission of the disease. Among these treatments,corticosteroids (CSs) were first introduced by Truelove and Witts[1]and currently remain the first-line treatment to induce remission in moderate to severe UC patients.Faubion et al[2] reported that 34 % of UC patients were treated with CSs and that immediate outcomes were complete remission in 54 %, partial remission in 30 %, and no response in 16 % of patients. They also showed that 1 -year outcomes were prolonged response in 49 %, CS dependence in 22 %, and operation in 29 % of patients[2]. Despite the effectiveness of CSs in inducing clinical remission in UC patients, it has been reported that 16 %-18 % of patients had no response to steroids(steroid-refractory), and the rate of steroid dependence was 17 %-22 % at 1 year following treatment with the initial CS therapy and increased to 38 % mostly within 2 years[2-7].

    Refractory UC generally includes both steroid-dependent and steroid-refractory UC.Along with the recent advancements of the treatment for UC, several breakthrough treatments, including biologics, have been developed for refractory UC[8-23]. A metaanalysis showed that anti-tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) antibodies had more clinical benefits than placebo control as evidenced by the former’s increased frequency of clinical remission, steroid-free remission, endoscopic remission, and decreased frequency of colectomy[24]. It was also reported that the rates of induction of steroidfree remission in refractory UC patients with anti-TNF-α antibodies ranged from 40 .0 % to 76 .5 %[6 ,9 ,11 ,15 ,16 ,18]. However, studies that analyzed the efficacy of biologics focused on the achievement of steroid-free remission in refractory UC patients are insufficient. On the contrary, despite the efficacy of anti-TNF-α antibody for UC,secondary loss of response (LOR) is a common clinical problem with its incidence rate ranging from 23 % to 46 % at 12 mo after anti-TNF-α initiation[25]. Moreover, it was reported that the incidence rates of LOR were 58 .3 % (adalimumab) and 59 .1 %(infliximab) during maintenance therapy (mean follow-up: 139 wk and 158 .8 wk,respectively)[26]. Regarding vedolizumab, it was also reported that the cumulative rate for LOR in UC patients was 39 % at 12 mo[27]. Concerning the adverse events of biologics, similar with other biological therapies, anti-TNF-α therapy may lead to serious infection, demyelinating disease, and associated mortality[28]. It was also reported that the use of anti-TNF-α antibody combined with thiopurines was associated with an increased risk of lymphoma in IBD[29].

    Thiopurines have been conventionally used for the treatment of steroid-dependent UC[30 -35]. Two randomized controlled trials have shown that the rates of the induction of CS-free remission with thiopurines in steroid-dependent UC patients were 44 % and 53 %, respectively[34 ,35 ]. However, Jharap et al[32]reported that thiopurine therapy has failed in approximately one-quarter of IBD patients within 3 mo after treatment initiation, which is mostly due to drug intolerance or toxicity. Moreover, thiopurines are associated with potential serious adverse events, such as an increased risk of lymphoma and nonmelanoma skin cancer[33].

    Cytapheresis (CAP) is a non-pharmacological extracorporeal therapy and has been developed as a treatment for UC[36 -42]. CAP is performed using two methods, namely,granulocyte and monocyte adsorptive apheresis (GMA), which uses cellulose acetate beads (Adacolumn, JIMRO Co., Ltd., Gunma, Japan), and leukocytapheresis (LCAP),which uses polyethylene phthalate fibers (Cellsorba., Asahi Kasei Medical Co., Ltd.,Tokyo, Japan)[42 ,43]. GMA selectively depletes elevated granulocytes and monocytes from the patients’ circulation, but spares most of the lymphocytes[42]. LCAP exerts antiinflammatory effects by removing activated leukocytes or platelets from the peripheral blood through an extracorporeal circulation[43]. It has been shown that CAP is an effective therapeutic strategy for patients with active UC with fewer adverse effects[36 -42]. However, to date, the number of studies focused on the efficacy of CAP in both steroid-dependent and steroid-refractory UC has been limited[43 -54].

    Despite the excellent therapeutic effects of CS for UC patients, prolonged CS therapy can result in multiple serious side effects such as diabetes mellitus, infection,osteonecrosis, and steroid-associated osteoporosis[55 ]. Furthermore, McCurdy et al[56]showed that IBD patients receiving CSs and immunomodulators were more likely to be diagnosed with cytomegalovirus diseases than IBD patients not receiving CSs and immunomodulators. Therefore, management of refractory UC patients is a crucial issue, and the goal of the treatment for such patients should be steroid-free remission.However, as described above, clinical studies focused on the achievement of steroidfree remission in refractory UC patients are insufficient. We had treated many UC patients with CAP and consequently suggested the efficacy of CAP for refractory UC patients. Considering these backgrounds, we retrospectively analyzed the efficacy of CAP specifically focused on the achievement of steroid-free remission in patients with steroid-dependent and steroid-refractory UC.

    MATERIALS AND METHODS

    Patients

    We retrospectively reviewed the collected data from 55 (male 29 , female 26 ) patients aged 16 -82 years (mean ± SD, 38 .7 ± 16 .7 years) with active refractory UC (steroiddependent type 33 , steroid-refractory type 21 , refractory but refused steroid therapy 1 )treated with CAP (GMA 38 , LCAP 17 ) between September 2002 and December 2019 (Table 1 ). The detailed clinical profiles of the patients enrolled in this study are shownin Table 1 . The dosage of prednisolone and the concomitant therapies at apheresis commencement are also shown in Table 1 . The rates of concomitant use of prednisolone, 5 -aminosalicylic acid, and immunomodulators were 98 .2 % (54 /55 ),94 .5 % (52 /55 ), and 21 .8 % (12 /55 ), respectively. Anti-TNF-α antibody (adalimumab)was administered to one patient. In most patients, concomitant medications except prednisolone were continued at the same dosage. The dosage of prednisolone was tapered or discontinued according to patients’ clinical improvement during the CAP therapy.

    Table 1 Patients’ characteristics in this study

    This retrospective study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Akita Red Cross Hospital (approval No: 195 ) and Akita University School of Medicine (approval No:2419 ). Written or oral informed consent was obtained from patients and/or parents of patients aged younger than 20 years.

    The primary endpoint of this study was the rate of achievement of steroid-free remission in refractory UC patients after the CAP therapy. The achievement of steroidfree remission included the induction of steroid-free remission in the first course of CAP and re-induction of steroid-free remission in the second, third, and fourth courses of CAP. The secondary endpoint was the rate of sustained steroid-free remission in refractory UC patients after the CAP therapy.

    Definition of steroid-dependent and steroid-refractory UC

    Steroid-dependent UC was defined as the disease that initially responds to steroids but could not maintain control of symptoms without steroids and requires low doses of steroids to remain symptom-free[6, 57]. Steroid-refractory UC was also defined as active UC characterized by the failure to respond to 0 .75 -1 .5 mg/kg per day of prednisolone administered over at least 1 wk[43 ,57].

    CAP

    Each patient was treated with 5 to 20 GMA or LCAP sessions (mean ± SD, 8 .8 ± 3 .8 sessions). A total of 20 patients were treated with 5 sessions of CAP, 29 patients with 10 sessions, 1 patient with 9 sessions, 1 patient with 15 sessions, 1 patient with 18 sessions, and 3 patients with 20 sessions. Under the Japanese health insurance treatment system, the 11 th CAP session was performed at 1 mo after the 10thCAP session in patients who received more than 10 CAP sessions. CAP was performed once weekly in principle. However, in some patients with severe UC, CAP was exceptionally performed twice a week for the first 2 -3 wk (intensive CAP). CAP was also exceptionally performed once 2 wk for the last several weeks in some patients whose symptoms improved to mild after the treatment with several sessions of CAP.

    Exclusion criteria

    Patients with serious cardiac, kidney, or liver diseases; malignancy; coagulation disorders; infections; history of hypersensitivity to heparin; severe dehydration,granulocytopenia, anemia, thrombocytopenia; and patients taking angiotensinconverting enzyme inhibitor were excluded.

    Evaluation of the efficacy of CAP

    Efficacy of the first course of CAP:Clinical efficacy between April 2008 and December 2019 were evaluated using the Lichtiger’s clinical activity index (CAI)[58]and that between September 2002 and March 2008 was evaluated using Sutherland index(disease activity index, DAI)[59]. Clinical remission was defined as decreased Lichtiger’s CAI in 4 or less or decreased DAI in less than 2 .5 [60]. In this study, we assessed patients who did not achieve clinical remission after CAP, suggesting the “poor effectiveness of CAP”. We evaluated the efficacy of CAP approximately 4 wk after the last apheresis session. We also examined the rate of steroid-free remission. We have defined“steroid-free” as the point when both oral steroids and enemas including steroids were discontinued. However, suppositories including small amounts of steroids were permitted, as an exception.

    Laboratory data (C-reactive protein level, serum albumin concentration, neutrophil count, and monocyte count) before and after CAP were also examined in 28 patients treated between April 2008 and December 2019 .

    Efficacy of the second, third, and fourth courses of CAP:Efficacy of the second course of CAP in patients experiencing a relapse during the observation period was assessed. Furthermore, efficacy of the third and fourth courses of CAP was also assessed specifically in patients who achieved steroid-free remission after the first course of CAP and experienced relapses during the observation period.

    Efficacy of CAP in colonic mucosal inflammation:Endoscopic findings after the first course of CAP in patients who achieved steroid-free remission were evaluated using the Mayo endoscopic subscore[61 ]. A score ≤ 1 suggested mucosal healing.

    Long-term efficacy:Long-term efficacy of CAP in patients who achieved steroid-free remission after the first course of CAP was examined by assessing (1 ) the rate of sustained steroid-free remission at 12 , 24 , and 36 mo after the first course of CAP and(2 ) overall rate of maintaining sustained steroid-free remission throughout the observation period.

    The surgical operation rate:The surgical operation rates of the patients within 6 mo, 3 years, and throughout the observation period after the first course of CAP were examined.

    Statistical analysis:Statistical analysis was performed using the paired t-test, and chisquared test, and a P value < 0 .05 was considered statistically significant.

    RESULTS

    Efficacy of the first course of CAP

    The rates of clinical remission, which includes steroid-free remission and clinical remission but not steroid-free remission, steroid-free remission, and poor effectiveness after CAP were 69 .1 %, 45 .5 %, and 30 .9 %, respectively (Figure 1 ). The rates of clinical remission, steroid-free remission, and poor effectiveness after GMA were 69 .2 %,43 .6 %, and 30 .8 %, respectively. The rates of clinical remission, steroid-free remission,and poor effectiveness after LCAP were 68 .8 %, 50 .0 %, and 31 .2 %, respectively. There were no significant differences in the rates of both clinical remission and steroid-free remission after CAP between patients who received GMA therapy and patients who received LCAP.

    In this study, thiopurines were concomitantly used in 12 patients. The rates of clinical remission, steroid-free remission, and poor effectiveness after CAP in patients who concomitantly received thiopurines were 66 .7 %, 41 .7 %, and 33 .3 % respectively.There were no significant differences in the rates of both clinical remission and steroidfree remission after CAP between patients who concomitantly received thiopurines and patients who did not receive thiopurines.

    For patients with steroid-dependent UC, the rates of clinical remission, steroid-free remission, and poor effectiveness after CAP were 69 .7 %, 42 .4 %, and 30 .3 %,respectively (Figure 2 ). On the contrary, the rates of clinical remission, steroid-free remission, and poor effectiveness after CAP in patients with steroid-refractory UC were 66 .7 %, 47 .6 %, and 33 .3 %, respectively (Figure 3 ). There were no significant differences in both rates of clinical remission and steroid-free remission between patients with steroid-dependent UC and patients with steroid-refractory UC.

    DAI and CAI scores (mean ± SE) before and after the first course of CAP are shown in Figures 4 and 5 . The mean DAI score before CAP was 11 .4 , which decreased significantly to 3 .36 after the CAP therapy (P < 0 .0001 ) (Figure 4 ). The mean CAI score before CAP was 9 .0 , which decreased significantly to 3 .63 after the CAP therapy (P <0 .0001 ) (Figure 5 ).

    Laboratory data before and after CAP are shown in Table 2 . As shown in Table 2 ,the inflammatory parameter (C-reactive protein) and the nutritional parameter (serum albumin concentration) significantly improved after CAP. Neutrophil count significantly decreased after CAP therapy. Monocyte count tended to decrease after CAP, but no significant difference was observed.

    The rates of steroid-free remission after the second course of CAP

    The second course of CAP was performed in 24 patients (12 patients who achieved steroid-free remission after the first course of CAP, 8 patients who achieved clinical remission but not steroid-free remission after the first course of CAP, 4 patients who had poor effectiveness in the first course of CAP) experiencing a relapse or worsening condition during the observation period. The rates of steroid-free remission after the second course of CAP in patients who achieved steroid-free remission after the first course of CAP, patients who achieved clinical remission but not steroid-free remission after the first course of CAP, and patients who had poor effectiveness in the first course of CAP were 83 .3 % (10 /12 ), 12 .5 % (1 /8 ), and 0 % (0 /4 ), respectively (Figure 6 ).The rate of steroid-free remission after the second course of CAP was significantly higher in patients who achieved steroid-free remission after the first course of CAP compared with that in patients who achieved clinical remission but not steroid-free remission after the first course of CAP (P = 0 .0018 ) and that in patients who had poor effectiveness in the first course of CAP (P = 0 .0029 ).

    The rates of steroid-free remission after the second, third, and fourth courses of CAP in patients who achieved steroid-free remission after the first course of CAP

    As shown above, the rate of steroid-free remission after the second course of CAP in patients who achieved steroid-free remission after the first course of CAP was 83 .3 %.In these patients, the rate of steroid-free remission after the second course of CAP in patients with steroid-dependent UC (83 .3 %) was the same as that of patients with steroid-refractory UC (83 .3 %).

    The third and fourth courses of CAP were performed in 6 patients and 5 patients,respectively, who achieved steroid-free remission after the first course of CAP and experienced relapses during the observation period. The rates of steroid-free remission after the third and fourth courses of CAP in these patients were 83 .3 % (5 /6 ) and 60 %(3 /5 ), respectively (Figure 7 ).

    Table 2 Laboratory data obtained (mean ± SE) before and after cytapheresis

    Figure 1 Efficacy of the first course of cytapheresis. The rates of clinical remission, which includes steroid-free remission and clinical remission without steroid-free remission, steroid-free remission, and poor effectiveness after cytapheresis were 69 .1 %, 45 .5 %, and 30 .9 %, respectively.

    Endoscopic findings of patients who achieved steroid-free remission after the first course of CAP

    Colonoscopic examination was performed in 21 out of the 25 patients (84 %) who achieved steroid-free remission after the first course of CAP. Mucosal healing was observed in all 21 patients after the first course of CAP [Mayo endoscopic subscore 0 in 17 patients (81 .0 %), Mayo endoscopic subscore 1 in 4 patients (19 .0 %)]. None of the patients showed a Mayo endoscopic subscore ≥ 2 after the CAP. Endoscopic images before and after the CAP therapy of 5 patients are shown in Figure 8 .

    Long-term efficacy of CAP in patients achieving steroid-free remission in the first course of CAP

    We could correctly follow the rate of sustained steroid-free remission for 3 years (36 mo) in all 25 patients who successfully achieved steroid-free remission after the first course of CAP. The rates of sustained steroid-free remission in these patients were 68 .0 % at 12 mo, 60 .0 % at 24 mo, and 56 .0 % at 36 mo after the first course of CAP(Figure 9 ). The rates of sustained steroid-free remission in patients with steroiddependent UC were 69 .2 % at 12 mo, 53 .8 % at 24 mo, and 46 .1 % at 36 mo, respectively.On the other hand, the rates of sustained steroid-free remission in patients with steroid-refractory UC were 63 .6 % at 12 mo, 63 .6 % at 24 mo, and 63 .6 % at 36 mo,respectively.

    The mean observation period of these 25 patients was 81 .5 ± 9 .7 mo (mean ± SE).Although the observation periods varied in these 25 patients, 9 patients (36 .0 %) had maintained sustained steroid-free remission throughout the observation periods. The mean period of maintained steroid-free remission of these 9 patients was 86 .6 ± 14 .3 mo (mean ± SE). Periods of sustained steroid-free remission and refractory type of the 9 patients are shown in Figure 10 . Two patients had maintained sustained steroid-free remission over 10 years after the first course of CAP. The summary of the results of this study is shown in Figure 11 .

    Figure 2 Efficacy of the first course of cytapheresis in the patients with steroid-dependent ulcerative colitis. The rates of clinical remission,steroid-free remission, and poor effectiveness after cytapheresis were 69 .7 %, 42 .4 %, and 30 .3 %, respectively.

    Figure 3 Efficacy of the first course of cytapheresis in the patients with steroid-refractory ulcerative colitis. The rates of clinical remission,steroid-free remission, and poor effectiveness after cytapheresis were 66 .7 %, 47 .6 %, and 33 .3 %, respectively.

    The surgical operation rates

    The surgical operation rate of the patients within 6 mo after the first course of CAP was 9 .1 % (5 /55 ). The surgical operation rate within 6 mo after the CAP was significantly lower in patients who achieved steroid-free remission after the first course of CAP (0 %) compared with that in patients who had poor effectiveness in the first course of CAP (29 .4 %) (P = 0 .0039 ). The surgical operation rate within 3 years after the first course of CAP was 12 .7 % (7 /55 ). The surgical operation rate within 3 years after the CAP was significantly lower in patients who achieved steroid-free remission after the first course of CAP (4 %) compared with that in patients who had poor effectiveness (29 .4 %) (P = 0 .0209 ). The surgical operation rate throughout the observation period [18 -193 mo (81 .5 ± 47 .3 (mean ± SD)] after the first course of CAP was 20 % (11 /55 ). The surgical operation rate throughout the observation period after the CAP was significantly lower in patients who achieved steroid-free remission after the first course of CAP (12 %) compared with that in patients who had poor effectiveness in the first course of CAP (41 .2 %) (P = 0 .0293 ).

    Figure 4 Mean disease activity index score before and after cytapheresis. Disease activity index score (mean ± SE) before and after cytapheresis is shown. The mean disease activity index score before cytapheresis was 11 .4 , which decreased significantly to 3 .36 after treatment (P < 0 .0001 ). CAP: Cytapheresis.

    Figure 5 Mean Lichtiger’s clinical activity index score before and after cytapheresis. Lichtiger’s clinical activity index score (mean ± SE) before and after cytapheresis is shown. The mean Lichtiger’s clinical activity index score before cytapheresis was 9 .0 , which decreased significantly to 3 .63 after treatment (P <0 .0001 ). CAP: Cytapheresis.

    Adverse events

    Headache and slight fever were observed in one patient during the CAP therapy. No serious adverse events were observed in all patients in this study.

    DISCUSSION

    Figure 6 The rates of steroid-free remission after the second course of cytapheresis. The rate of steroid-free remission after the second course of cytapheresis (CAP) was significantly higher in patients who achieved steroid-free remission after the first course of CAP (83 .3 %) compared with that in patients who achieved clinical remission but not steroid-free remission after the first course of CAP (12 .5 %, P = 0 .0018 ) and that in patients who had poor effectiveness after the first course of CAP (0 %, P = 0 .0029 ). CAP: Cytapheresis.

    Figure 7 Rates of steroid-free remission after the second, third, and fourth courses of cytapheresis in patients who achieved steroid-free remission after the first course of cytapheresis. The rates of steroid-free remission after the second, third, and fourth courses of cytapheresis in patients who achieved steroid-free remission after the first course of cytapheresis and then experienced relapses were 83 .3 %, 83 .3 %, 60 %, respectively. CAP: Cytapheresis.

    The primary endpoint of this study was the rate of achievement of steroid-free remission in refractory UC patients after the CAP therapy. In this context, we demonstrated that CAP effectively induced steroid-free remission not only in patients with steroid-dependent (42 .4 %) but also in patients with steroid-refractory (47 .6 %) UC.We also showed that mucosal healing was observed in all patients who achieved steroid-free remission after the first course of CAP. Previous studies examining the efficacy of CAP in refractory UC and the results of this study are shown in Table 3 [43 -53].In these studies, eight studies[45 -48 ,50 -53]examined the efficacy of CAP for induction of steroid-free remission and three studies[43 ,44 ,49]examined that for induction of only clinical remission. Here, we discuss the eight studies examining the efficacy of CAP for induction of steroid-free remission. In the eight studies, seven studies[46 -48 ,50 -53]examined the rate of the induction of steroid-free remission in patients with steroid-dependent UC and one study[45]examined that in patients with steroid-refractory UC. Regarding steroid-refractory UC, it is difficult to evaluate the results of the study because there is only one study, which only comprised eight steroid-refractory patients, that assessedthis type of UC[45]. With regard to steroid-dependent UC, according to the seven previous studies[46 -48 ,50 -53], the rates of the induction of steroid-free remission ranged from 13 % to 55 % (mean 31 .4 %). Although it is difficult to compare the results of these studies with that of our study because of the diversity of the patients’ background enrolled in the studies, the rate of the induction of steroid-free remission of our study is higher than that of the six previous studies[46 ,48 ,50 -53]. Based on the following reports[43 ,46 ,50], we suggest that the differences of the history of previous medication and the differences of the methods of CAP treatment of the studies might influence the rates of steroid-free remission. Dignass et al[50]showed that remission was achieved at week 12 after Adacolumn apheresis by 40 .3 % of patients who failed on immunosuppressants, but only 27 .8 % of patients who failed on anti-TNF-α treatment.On the other hand, Yokoyama et al[43]showed that a multivariate logistic regression analysis comparing the patients’ backgrounds, concomitant medications, and therapeutic variables of LCAP between the remission and nonremission groups identified intensive LCAP (≥ 4 LCAP treatments within the first 2 wk) as the only factor that was significantly related to remission after LCAP. On the contrary, Ricart et al[46]showed that increasing the number of apheresis sessions affords a significant steroid-sparing effect in steroid-dependent UC. Looking back with reference to these reports, in our study, only one patient who had insufficient response to anti-TNF-α treatment was included, and intensive CAP was performed in some severe cases in contrast to the six previous studies[46 ,48 ,50 -53]performing weekly apheresis in all patients.Additionally, it appears that patients in our study received more CAP sessions [5 -20 sessions (mean 8 .8 )] compared with the previous studies. We suggest that a selection of an appropriate CAP treatment method for each patient is important to induce steroid-free remission effectively in refractory UC patients.

    Table 3 Previous studies examining the efficacy of cytapheresis in refractory ulcerative colitis

    Figure 8 Endoscopic images of 5 patients who achieved steroid-free remission after the first course of cytapheresis. Endoscopic images before and after the cytapheresis (CAP) therapy of 5 patients who achieved steroid-free remission after the first course of CAP are shown. Active inflammation (Mayo endoscopic subscore ≥ 2 ) was observed in the colonic mucosa in all 5 patients before the CAP therapy. On the contrary, mucosal healing (Mayo endoscopic subscore ≤ 1 ) was observed in all 5 patients after the CAP therapy. MES: Mayo endoscopic subscore; MES 1 /MES 0 : Mayo endoscopic subscore after cytapheresis;CAP: Cytapheresis.

    Figure 9 Rates of sustained steroid-free remission at 12 , 24 , and 36 mo after the first course of cytapheresis in patients who achieved steroid-free remission after the first course of cytapheresis. The rates of sustained steroid-free remission in patients who achieved steroid-free remission after the first course of cytapheresis were 68 .0 % at 12 mo, 60 .0 % at 24 mo, and 56 .0 % at 36 mo after the first course of cytapheresis.

    Regarding the achievement of steroid-free remission, assessing the rate of reinduction of steroid-free remission with CAP in patients who experience relapse after the first course of CAP is also required. In this regard, our study showed that the second course of CAP effectively re-induced steroid-free remission (83 .3 %) in both steroid-dependent and steroid-refractory UC patients who had achieved steroid-free remission in the first course of CAP. The rate of re-induction of steroid-free remission was significantly higher in patients who achieved steroid-free remission in the first course of CAP (83 .3 %) compared with that of patients who had achieved clinical remission but not steroid-free remission (12 .5 %) and that of patients who had poor effectiveness in the first course of CAP (0 %). Furthermore, our study also showed that the third and the fourth courses of CAP repeatedly induced steroid-free remission at a high rate in patients who achieved steroid-free remission in the first course of CAP.Based on these results, we suggest that patients achieving steroid-free remission in the first course of CAP are significantly likely to have a high sensitivity to CAP, namely,high responders to CAP. There have been no studies assessing the rate of re-induction of steroid-free remission of CAP in patients with steroid-dependent and steroidrefractory UC. However, there have been two studies that examined the re-efficacy of CAP in patients with active UC or Crohn’s disease (CD)[37 ,41 ]. Takayama et al[41]examined the effects of the second course of CAP in UC patients with moderate to severe activity experiencing relapse during the disease course. They showed that the percentage of remissive and effective responses of the second course of CAP was 79 %in patients who had remissive and effective responses in the first course of CAP,whereas 40 % in patients who had noneffective responses in the first course of CAP.Lindberg et al[37 ] presented 14 patients (UC 4 , CD 10 ) who experienced relapse after showing initial remission and were re-treated with GMA. Although the remission rates of the re-treatments of GMA in UC patients were unclear, they showed that 13 of the 14 patients (93 %) achieved a second remission. They also showed that following further relapses, all patients were successfully re-treated with GMA for the third,fourth, and fifth time. Thus, the previous two studies also showed that re-treatment of CAP seemed to be effective in UC patients who had remissive responses in the first course of CAP, supporting our results.

    Figure 10 Periods of sustained steroid-free remission and refractory type of the 9 patients who had maintained steroid-free remission throughout the observation periods. Nine patients (36 .0 %) had maintained sustained steroid-free remission throughout the observation periods. Periods of sustained steroid-free remission of the 9 patients are shown in the figure. The mean period of maintained steroid-free remission of these 9 patients was 86 .6 ± 14 .3 mo (mean ± SE). Nine patients included 5 steroid-dependent patients and 4 steroid-refractory patients. Periods of sustained steroid-free remission of the 9 patients are shown in the figure. SR: Steroid-refractory patient; SD: Steroid-dependent patient.

    The secondary endpoint of this study was the rate of sustained steroid-free remission in refractory UC patients after the CAP therapy. In this regard, we showed that CAP had good long-term efficacy for the maintenance of sustained steroid-free remission (68 % at 12 mo, 60 % at 24 mo, 56 % at 36 mo) in refractory UC patients who achieved steroid-free remission in the first course of CAP. Furthermore, interestingly,36 % of patients had maintained sustained steroid-free remission throughout the observation periods, and two patients had maintained it over 10 years. Previous studies examining the rate of sustained steroid-free remission after the CAP therapy in refractory UC patients are also shown in Table 3 . Among them, three studies examined the rate of sustained steroid-free remission in patients with steroid-dependent UC[46 -48].The rates of sustained steroid-free remission at 12 mo after CAP of the three studies ranged from 51 % to 85 .7 % (mean 70 .6 %). Thus, these studies and our study (69 .2 % in steroid-dependent patients) showed good long-term efficacy in the rates of sustained steroid-free remission. In this regard, in our study, mucosal healing was observed in all patients who achieved steroid-free remission after the first course of CAP. Ricart et al[46]also showed that all patients who experienced clinical remission also experienced endoscopic remission and good long-term efficacy. Cabriada et al[48]showed that among those patients in steroid-free remission, 96 % also achieved endoscopic remission. They also showed that a tendency for sustained remission at 1 year was observed when initial endoscopic remission was achieved[47]. Based on these findings, we suggest that endoscopic mucosal healing was closely involved in the maintenance of sustained steroid-free remission and good long-term efficacy of CAP.

    In this study, no serious adverse events were observed during the CAP therapy. It has been reported that other therapies, such as anti-TNF-α antibody administration,are associated with risk of serious infections, lymphoma, and associated mortality in IBD[28 ,29 ,50]. In this context, several studies reporting on the safety of CAP have been considered important[39 ,42 ,43 ,49 ,50 ]. Among these studies, Hibi et al[39]evaluated the safety and clinical efficacy of Adacolumn in 697 patients with UC in 53 medical institutions.They showed that no serious adverse events were observed, and mild to moderate adverse events were observed in 7 .7 % of patients. Motoya et al[42]conducted a retrospective multicenter cohort study that evaluated the safety and effectiveness of GMA in 437 IBD patients under special situations. They showed that the incidence of adverse events among elderly patients was similar in all patients.

    Figure 11 Summary of the results of the study. The results of this study are summarized in the figure. CAP: Cytapheresis.

    There have been several studies comparing the impact of CAP in the clinical practice with the conventional pharmacotherapy for UC[53 ,62 -64]. A meta-analysis showed that GMA is effective for inducing clinical remission in patients with UC compared with CS [odds ratio (OR), 2 .23 ; 95 % confidence interval (CI): 1 .38 -3 .60 ] and that the rate of adverse events by apheresis was significantly lower than that by CS(OR, 0 .24 ; 95 %CI: 0 .15 -0 .37 )[62]. Another meta-analysis showed that comparing with conventional pharmacotherapy including CS, LCAP supplementation presented a significant benefit in promoting a response rate (OR, 2 .88 , 95 %CI: 1 .60 -5 .18 ) and remission rate (OR, 2 .04 , 95 %CI: 1 .36 -3 .07 ) together with significant higher steroidsparing effects (OR, 10 .49 , 95 %CI: 3 .44 -31 .93 ) in patients with active moderate-tosevere UC[63 ]. In this regard, Domènech et al[53 ] showed that the addition of 7 weekly sessions of GMA to a conventional course of oral prednisolone did not increase the proportion of steroid-free remissions in patients with active steroid-dependent UC. On the other hand, Tominaga et al[64]showed that GMA produced efficacy equivalent to prednisolone and was without safety concern. Although they also showed that the average medical cost was 12739 .4 €/patient in the GMA group and 8751 .3 € in the prednisolone group (P < 0 .05 ), they concluded that the higher cost of GMA vs prednisolone should be compromised by good safety profile of GMA.

    In summary, our study showed that CAP was effective in inducing steroid-free remission and maintained sustained steroid-free remission in both steroid-dependent and steroid-refractory UC patients. Additionally, our study also showed that CAP reinduced high-rate steroid-free remission repeatedly in patients who achieved steroidfree remission in the first course of CAP, namely, patients potentially having a high sensitivity to CAP. Therefore, considering the high level of safety of CAP, we suggest that CAP should be one of the first-line therapies for steroid-dependent and steroidrefractory UC patients. We also suggest that CAP should be chosen as a first-line therapy for patients who achieve steroid-free remission in the first course of CAP and thereafter experience relapses during the disease course.

    However, this study has some limitations; that is, this study is a retrospective study with small sample size that was conducted only in two medical institutions. Thus, a multicenter prospective study with large sample sizes is required to warrant our results.

    CONCLUSION

    In conclusion, our results suggest that CAP effectively induces and maintains steroidfree remission in refractory UC and re-induces high-rate steroid-free remission repeatedly in patients achieving steroid-free remission after the first course of CAP.

    ARTICLE HIGHLIGHTS

    Research perspectives

    A multicenter prospective study with large sample sizes is required to warrant our results.

    ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

    We would like to thank Dr. Koizumi S (Center for Cancer Registry and Information Services in Akita University Hospital) for biostatical review of the study.

    中文天堂在线官网| 免费久久久久久久精品成人欧美视频| 日韩成人av中文字幕在线观看| 我要看黄色一级片免费的| 超碰97精品在线观看| 丁香六月天网| 91精品三级在线观看| 亚洲精品视频女| 自拍欧美九色日韩亚洲蝌蚪91| 大片免费播放器 马上看| 欧美成人精品欧美一级黄| 欧美老熟妇乱子伦牲交| 亚洲激情五月婷婷啪啪| 欧美少妇被猛烈插入视频| 精品少妇内射三级| 美女视频免费永久观看网站| 国产不卡av网站在线观看| av网站免费在线观看视频| 国产一区二区在线观看av| 亚洲色图综合在线观看| 午夜精品国产一区二区电影| 免费高清在线观看日韩| 最近最新中文字幕免费大全7| 国产成人a∨麻豆精品| 久热久热在线精品观看| 九草在线视频观看| 亚洲伊人久久精品综合| 亚洲精品国产av成人精品| 国产在线一区二区三区精| 国产在线免费精品| 欧美bdsm另类| 久久久久久久精品精品| 18禁观看日本| 熟女电影av网| 啦啦啦在线观看免费高清www| 一本久久精品| av在线老鸭窝| 国产女主播在线喷水免费视频网站| 免费不卡的大黄色大毛片视频在线观看| 亚洲婷婷狠狠爱综合网| 少妇精品久久久久久久| 日本免费在线观看一区| 国产精品三级大全| 在线免费观看不下载黄p国产| 午夜免费观看性视频| 高清黄色对白视频在线免费看| 大码成人一级视频| 春色校园在线视频观看| 秋霞伦理黄片| 免费高清在线观看视频在线观看| 黄片播放在线免费| 国产精品久久久久久精品古装| 欧美黄色片欧美黄色片| 99热国产这里只有精品6| 一区二区三区四区激情视频| 欧美亚洲日本最大视频资源| 久久女婷五月综合色啪小说| av又黄又爽大尺度在线免费看| 99久久精品国产国产毛片| 91成人精品电影| 香蕉丝袜av| 亚洲成国产人片在线观看| 午夜福利影视在线免费观看| 成年女人在线观看亚洲视频| 国产一区二区激情短视频 | 黑人欧美特级aaaaaa片| 99久久中文字幕三级久久日本| 少妇人妻久久综合中文| 国产成人免费观看mmmm| 国产精品三级大全| 天美传媒精品一区二区| 99九九在线精品视频| 亚洲国产精品成人久久小说| 亚洲av综合色区一区| www.自偷自拍.com| 亚洲国产看品久久| 老司机影院毛片| 视频区图区小说| videossex国产| av在线app专区| av在线app专区| 国产成人精品福利久久| 最近最新中文字幕免费大全7| 最近手机中文字幕大全| 欧美97在线视频| 中文天堂在线官网| 免费观看性生交大片5| 国产精品熟女久久久久浪| 天美传媒精品一区二区| 精品福利永久在线观看| 亚洲一区二区三区欧美精品| 波多野结衣一区麻豆| 国产精品国产三级专区第一集| 欧美人与性动交α欧美精品济南到 | 另类亚洲欧美激情| 久久久久国产网址| 亚洲欧美精品自产自拍| 老鸭窝网址在线观看| 人人妻人人澡人人看| 亚洲内射少妇av| 91在线精品国自产拍蜜月| 久久久久网色| 99久久人妻综合| 久久久久久久亚洲中文字幕| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区黑人 | 精品一区二区三卡| 最近最新中文字幕大全免费视频 | 两个人免费观看高清视频| 丁香六月天网| 国产xxxxx性猛交| 欧美激情 高清一区二区三区| 久久av网站| 青春草视频在线免费观看| 黄片小视频在线播放| 老汉色av国产亚洲站长工具| 国产成人精品久久久久久| 亚洲av国产av综合av卡| 免费在线观看黄色视频的| av网站在线播放免费| 天堂8中文在线网| 精品卡一卡二卡四卡免费| 亚洲欧美中文字幕日韩二区| 另类精品久久| 国产亚洲av片在线观看秒播厂| 秋霞伦理黄片| 国产av精品麻豆| 国产精品成人在线| 亚洲婷婷狠狠爱综合网| 日韩欧美一区视频在线观看| 欧美精品一区二区免费开放| 午夜福利影视在线免费观看| 亚洲男人天堂网一区| 国产极品粉嫩免费观看在线| 9热在线视频观看99| 18+在线观看网站| 五月伊人婷婷丁香| 久久久久网色| 在线精品无人区一区二区三| 少妇人妻 视频| 亚洲欧美清纯卡通| 久久av网站| 日韩不卡一区二区三区视频在线| 曰老女人黄片| 国产欧美亚洲国产| 少妇的丰满在线观看| 国产精品99久久99久久久不卡 | 婷婷色麻豆天堂久久| 丰满迷人的少妇在线观看| 欧美 日韩 精品 国产| 午夜福利在线免费观看网站| 久久午夜综合久久蜜桃| 午夜福利视频在线观看免费| 大香蕉久久成人网| 国产在视频线精品| 亚洲人成网站在线观看播放| 亚洲av.av天堂| 亚洲欧美中文字幕日韩二区| 日韩熟女老妇一区二区性免费视频| 日韩中文字幕视频在线看片| 黄色 视频免费看| 99国产综合亚洲精品| 日韩中文字幕视频在线看片| 国产一级毛片在线| 永久免费av网站大全| 综合色丁香网| 一级爰片在线观看| 欧美日韩精品成人综合77777| 咕卡用的链子| 国产精品国产av在线观看| 日本午夜av视频| 少妇猛男粗大的猛烈进出视频| 亚洲国产欧美日韩在线播放| 成年动漫av网址| 免费大片黄手机在线观看| 国产精品av久久久久免费| 国产精品成人在线| 欧美中文综合在线视频| 中文字幕精品免费在线观看视频| 午夜激情av网站| 九九爱精品视频在线观看| 久久久久精品人妻al黑| 美女大奶头黄色视频| 国产 一区精品| 国产精品欧美亚洲77777| 精品少妇内射三级| 999精品在线视频| 久久婷婷青草| 成年人免费黄色播放视频| 国产黄色免费在线视频| 中国三级夫妇交换| 精品少妇久久久久久888优播| 免费黄色在线免费观看| 欧美97在线视频| 国产免费福利视频在线观看| 日韩中文字幕视频在线看片| 国产精品熟女久久久久浪| 成年女人在线观看亚洲视频| 久久精品国产亚洲av高清一级| 国产成人免费观看mmmm| 午夜福利视频精品| 欧美精品亚洲一区二区| 日韩视频在线欧美| 成年美女黄网站色视频大全免费| 校园人妻丝袜中文字幕| 丰满少妇做爰视频| 日韩制服丝袜自拍偷拍| 90打野战视频偷拍视频| 亚洲伊人久久精品综合| 日日爽夜夜爽网站| 欧美日韩av久久| 熟女av电影| 最近最新中文字幕免费大全7| 咕卡用的链子| 男女午夜视频在线观看| 亚洲第一青青草原| 久久人妻熟女aⅴ| 久久精品久久久久久噜噜老黄| 综合色丁香网| 国产黄色视频一区二区在线观看| 午夜免费观看性视频| 人人妻人人澡人人看| 久久精品夜色国产| 人人妻人人澡人人爽人人夜夜| 亚洲av男天堂| 成年人午夜在线观看视频| 久久久精品区二区三区| 日韩一区二区视频免费看| 美女脱内裤让男人舔精品视频| av福利片在线| 精品久久久精品久久久| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区国产| 精品亚洲成国产av| 精品酒店卫生间| 亚洲国产av影院在线观看| 久久精品夜色国产| 久久99一区二区三区| 国精品久久久久久国模美| 国产色婷婷99| 日韩制服骚丝袜av| 香蕉精品网在线| 母亲3免费完整高清在线观看 | 午夜福利乱码中文字幕| 一本色道久久久久久精品综合| 韩国高清视频一区二区三区| 国产成人精品久久久久久| 亚洲精品av麻豆狂野| 亚洲美女搞黄在线观看| 欧美日韩一区二区视频在线观看视频在线| xxx大片免费视频| 最近手机中文字幕大全| 精品亚洲乱码少妇综合久久| 亚洲久久久国产精品| av在线观看视频网站免费| 成人18禁高潮啪啪吃奶动态图| 久久久精品区二区三区| 久久久亚洲精品成人影院| 99久久综合免费| 黄片小视频在线播放| 久久久久国产一级毛片高清牌| 18禁动态无遮挡网站| a级毛片在线看网站| 人妻人人澡人人爽人人| 亚洲av电影在线进入| 久久人人爽av亚洲精品天堂| 欧美在线黄色| 精品一区二区免费观看| 成人二区视频| 精品人妻偷拍中文字幕| 一级毛片我不卡| 高清视频免费观看一区二区| 国产精品一区二区在线不卡| 久久精品aⅴ一区二区三区四区 | 乱人伦中国视频| 欧美亚洲 丝袜 人妻 在线| 不卡av一区二区三区| 精品酒店卫生间| 国产日韩一区二区三区精品不卡| 亚洲人成网站在线观看播放| 爱豆传媒免费全集在线观看| 成年av动漫网址| 成人手机av| 曰老女人黄片| 午夜福利网站1000一区二区三区| av国产精品久久久久影院| 久久精品国产亚洲av天美| 美女脱内裤让男人舔精品视频| 精品一区二区免费观看| 我要看黄色一级片免费的| 美女中出高潮动态图| 天天操日日干夜夜撸| 久久ye,这里只有精品| 婷婷色av中文字幕| www.av在线官网国产| 免费av中文字幕在线| 中文字幕制服av| 最近中文字幕2019免费版| 人人澡人人妻人| 午夜福利一区二区在线看| 中国三级夫妇交换| 午夜福利视频在线观看免费| 色吧在线观看| 精品人妻一区二区三区麻豆| 国产一区二区在线观看av| 黄色 视频免费看| 免费高清在线观看视频在线观看| 久久人人爽人人片av| 精品福利永久在线观看| 久久久久精品性色| 亚洲一码二码三码区别大吗| 亚洲精品av麻豆狂野| 午夜影院在线不卡| 亚洲一码二码三码区别大吗| 97在线视频观看| 一边摸一边做爽爽视频免费| 国产探花极品一区二区| 一区二区av电影网| 在线 av 中文字幕| 成人手机av| 久久久久精品性色| av网站免费在线观看视频| 久久国内精品自在自线图片| 欧美日韩一区二区视频在线观看视频在线| 国产在视频线精品| 免费女性裸体啪啪无遮挡网站| 男男h啪啪无遮挡| 九草在线视频观看| 91精品伊人久久大香线蕉| 亚洲在久久综合| 9色porny在线观看| 亚洲,欧美,日韩| 亚洲欧洲精品一区二区精品久久久 | 丰满饥渴人妻一区二区三| 久久免费观看电影| 亚洲精品成人av观看孕妇| 天天操日日干夜夜撸| 99久国产av精品国产电影| 黑丝袜美女国产一区| 色播在线永久视频| 99精国产麻豆久久婷婷| 婷婷色综合www| 国产高清不卡午夜福利| videossex国产| 国产成人精品在线电影| 99九九在线精品视频| 久久女婷五月综合色啪小说| 久久韩国三级中文字幕| 久久久久久久久久人人人人人人| 一本久久精品| 寂寞人妻少妇视频99o| 国产在视频线精品| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区黑人 | 一区二区三区精品91| 秋霞在线观看毛片| 欧美精品一区二区免费开放| 欧美成人精品欧美一级黄| 亚洲熟女精品中文字幕| 久久久久久久大尺度免费视频| 波多野结衣一区麻豆| 亚洲精品中文字幕在线视频| 国产熟女午夜一区二区三区| 天天躁夜夜躁狠狠躁躁| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区黑人 | 男女边摸边吃奶| 水蜜桃什么品种好| 日产精品乱码卡一卡2卡三| 精品少妇一区二区三区视频日本电影 | 看十八女毛片水多多多| 99久久综合免费| 国产精品一区二区在线观看99| 亚洲国产欧美网| 免费高清在线观看日韩| 中文字幕精品免费在线观看视频| 满18在线观看网站| 日韩 亚洲 欧美在线| 亚洲精品视频女| 99热全是精品| 免费高清在线观看视频在线观看| 婷婷成人精品国产| 亚洲av成人精品一二三区| 精品99又大又爽又粗少妇毛片| 最新中文字幕久久久久| 亚洲少妇的诱惑av| 大码成人一级视频| 人妻 亚洲 视频| 免费av中文字幕在线| 国产又色又爽无遮挡免| 黄色怎么调成土黄色| 久久久久国产网址| 咕卡用的链子| 国产成人精品无人区| a 毛片基地| 母亲3免费完整高清在线观看 | 亚洲欧美精品自产自拍| 国产精品99久久99久久久不卡 | 久久午夜综合久久蜜桃| 不卡视频在线观看欧美| 在线观看免费高清a一片| 看十八女毛片水多多多| 婷婷色综合www| 亚洲av日韩在线播放| a 毛片基地| 婷婷色麻豆天堂久久| 久久精品久久久久久久性| 男人操女人黄网站| 国产在线一区二区三区精| 成人国产av品久久久| 岛国毛片在线播放| 午夜91福利影院| 熟女电影av网| 亚洲国产精品成人久久小说| 一区二区三区精品91| 香蕉精品网在线| 久久这里只有精品19| 日本91视频免费播放| 免费不卡的大黄色大毛片视频在线观看| 久久久久久久亚洲中文字幕| 一级毛片电影观看| 国产毛片在线视频| 午夜福利视频精品| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区黑人 | 日韩中字成人| 丁香六月天网| 免费av中文字幕在线| 国产伦理片在线播放av一区| 一二三四中文在线观看免费高清| 中文字幕另类日韩欧美亚洲嫩草| 人妻少妇偷人精品九色| 91aial.com中文字幕在线观看| 国产精品蜜桃在线观看| av免费在线看不卡| 男人添女人高潮全过程视频| 国产日韩一区二区三区精品不卡| 美女高潮到喷水免费观看| 午夜日韩欧美国产| 满18在线观看网站| 韩国高清视频一区二区三区| 搡女人真爽免费视频火全软件| 国产日韩欧美亚洲二区| 欧美中文综合在线视频| 亚洲在久久综合| 精品少妇内射三级| 亚洲一码二码三码区别大吗| 建设人人有责人人尽责人人享有的| 观看av在线不卡| 高清在线视频一区二区三区| 国产男女内射视频| 99re6热这里在线精品视频| 嫩草影院入口| 成人毛片60女人毛片免费| 99热全是精品| 少妇人妻 视频| 一级爰片在线观看| 成人18禁高潮啪啪吃奶动态图| 免费大片黄手机在线观看| 一级片'在线观看视频| 在线观看免费视频网站a站| 美女xxoo啪啪120秒动态图| 欧美激情极品国产一区二区三区| 最近手机中文字幕大全| 亚洲精品日韩在线中文字幕| 中文字幕制服av| 国产精品亚洲av一区麻豆 | 久久免费观看电影| 香蕉精品网在线| 一级毛片 在线播放| 午夜福利乱码中文字幕| 亚洲色图综合在线观看| 永久网站在线| 精品国产超薄肉色丝袜足j| 搡女人真爽免费视频火全软件| 免费少妇av软件| 久久影院123| 五月开心婷婷网| 色播在线永久视频| 国产精品一区二区在线观看99| 国产精品久久久久久av不卡| 日本欧美视频一区| 国产 一区精品| 久久久久久免费高清国产稀缺| 99精国产麻豆久久婷婷| 国产精品欧美亚洲77777| 精品国产一区二区三区四区第35| 爱豆传媒免费全集在线观看| 女人高潮潮喷娇喘18禁视频| 亚洲国产av影院在线观看| 国产爽快片一区二区三区| 欧美人与性动交α欧美精品济南到 | 如何舔出高潮| 波多野结衣一区麻豆| 婷婷成人精品国产| 国产精品一国产av| 婷婷成人精品国产| 欧美日韩视频精品一区| 丰满饥渴人妻一区二区三| 国产黄频视频在线观看| 性色av一级| 国产一区二区三区av在线| 婷婷色av中文字幕| 两性夫妻黄色片| 三级国产精品片| 欧美亚洲 丝袜 人妻 在线| 侵犯人妻中文字幕一二三四区| 久久久亚洲精品成人影院| 国产成人aa在线观看| 亚洲av欧美aⅴ国产| 国产精品嫩草影院av在线观看| 永久网站在线| 女性被躁到高潮视频| 久久热在线av| 亚洲三级黄色毛片| 啦啦啦在线观看免费高清www| 久久久久久久亚洲中文字幕| 一本—道久久a久久精品蜜桃钙片| 精品亚洲乱码少妇综合久久| 男女高潮啪啪啪动态图| 亚洲成色77777| 97人妻天天添夜夜摸| 五月伊人婷婷丁香| 男人添女人高潮全过程视频| 一区二区三区四区激情视频| 男女下面插进去视频免费观看| 老汉色∧v一级毛片| 可以免费在线观看a视频的电影网站 | 精品人妻熟女毛片av久久网站| 亚洲欧美清纯卡通| 欧美精品一区二区免费开放| 国产精品久久久av美女十八| 人人妻人人添人人爽欧美一区卜| 制服丝袜香蕉在线| 国产精品久久久久久精品古装| 爱豆传媒免费全集在线观看| 亚洲在久久综合| 国产精品熟女久久久久浪| 波多野结衣一区麻豆| 日韩视频在线欧美| 高清不卡的av网站| 日韩人妻精品一区2区三区| 男人舔女人的私密视频| 一级毛片电影观看| 亚洲成人av在线免费| 久久人人爽人人片av| 99热网站在线观看| 久久亚洲国产成人精品v| 一本久久精品| 香蕉国产在线看| av在线老鸭窝| 久久久久久久精品精品| 国产成人aa在线观看| 精品国产一区二区久久| kizo精华| 又黄又粗又硬又大视频| 一区在线观看完整版| 青春草视频在线免费观看| 啦啦啦在线免费观看视频4| 美女大奶头黄色视频| 黑人巨大精品欧美一区二区蜜桃| 欧美另类一区| 国产av精品麻豆| 性色av一级| 国产男人的电影天堂91| 精品酒店卫生间| 免费黄色在线免费观看| 色吧在线观看| 精品人妻熟女毛片av久久网站| 中文乱码字字幕精品一区二区三区| 欧美bdsm另类| 少妇的逼水好多| 精品久久久精品久久久| 午夜av观看不卡| 美女中出高潮动态图| 久久韩国三级中文字幕| 18在线观看网站| 波多野结衣av一区二区av| 国产亚洲最大av| 你懂的网址亚洲精品在线观看| 老汉色∧v一级毛片| 午夜久久久在线观看| 久久国产精品大桥未久av| 麻豆乱淫一区二区| 久久久久国产一级毛片高清牌| 大香蕉久久网| 亚洲五月色婷婷综合| 免费不卡的大黄色大毛片视频在线观看| 国产在线视频一区二区| 丝袜脚勾引网站| 久久久精品国产亚洲av高清涩受| 黄片小视频在线播放| 色婷婷久久久亚洲欧美| 搡女人真爽免费视频火全软件| 亚洲精品一二三| 欧美人与性动交α欧美软件| 日本午夜av视频| 少妇的逼水好多| 我要看黄色一级片免费的| 精品国产乱码久久久久久小说| 免费看不卡的av| 免费在线观看视频国产中文字幕亚洲 | 久久久久精品性色| 精品一区二区免费观看| 久久精品国产亚洲av涩爱| 最近2019中文字幕mv第一页| 桃花免费在线播放| 亚洲精品美女久久av网站| 亚洲欧美精品综合一区二区三区 | 纯流量卡能插随身wifi吗| 各种免费的搞黄视频| 久久婷婷青草| 91在线精品国自产拍蜜月| 成人亚洲欧美一区二区av| 亚洲一区中文字幕在线| 人人妻人人澡人人看| 亚洲男人天堂网一区| 欧美精品亚洲一区二区| 一本色道久久久久久精品综合| 国产精品.久久久|