Can Therapeutic Apheresis Flush Microplastics from Your Blood?

In recent years, microplastics have been detected not just in the environment but also in human tissues—including blood, lungs, liver, even the brain. These tiny particles may disrupt cellular processes via oxidative stress, inflammation, and potential immune dysfunction. A new development reported by betterhealthfacts.com examines whether therapeutic apheresis—a blood‑filtering technique already used in autoimmune, lipid, or neurological conditions—can remove microplastics from the bloodstream. Here, we explore the science, evidence, procedures, costs, and risks involved.

What Are Microplastics and Why Do They Matter?

Microplastics are plastic fragments under 5 millimetres; when under 1 micrometre, they're considered nanoplastics. Originating from packaging, textiles, cosmetics, and industrial waste, these particles are now ubiquitous in air, food, water, and human tissue.

Studies have shown that:

• Particles reach the bloodstream and accumulate in organs including the liver, lungs, brain, and reproductive tissues.
• Ingested microplastics can cross gut epithelial barriers (via Peyer's patches) and enter circulation.
• Nano-sized fragments accumulate over time, potentially triggering immune activation, oxidative stress, and inflammation.

Animal studies demonstrate neurological and cardiovascular effects—rats exposed to nanoplastics show brain inflammation and memory impairment; plastic particles are found in arterial plaques at higher risk for stroke or heart attack.

What Is Therapeutic Apheresis?

Therapeutic apheresis is an extracorporeal blood filtration procedure used to selectively remove plasma components—like antibodies, lipids, toxins—before returning cleaned blood to the patient via a second venous access. This is done using specialized filters and adsorbers.

There are several types:

• Plasma separation: Removes plasma and filters out substances before returning it.
• Adsorption-based: Filters remove targeted molecules like autoantibodies, inflammatory mediators, or toxins.

Monitoring during the procedure includes vital signs and optionally nutrient replacements post-filtration for patient safety.

German Study: First Evidence Microplastics May Be Removed

A recent small study published in Brain Medicine by a German research team treated 21 patients diagnosed with chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS/ME)—including post‑viral and possibly long COVID cases—using double‑filter apheresis (INUSpheresis®).

• Each patient underwent two sessions.
• Researchers analyzed the waste eluate via infrared spectroscopy and detected microplastic‑like particles matching polyamide 6 and polyurethane—two common industrial plastics.
• This represents the first clinical evidence that microplastics can be physically separated from human blood.

However, the study did not measure blood microplastic levels before and after treatment, so it only confirms presence of particles in the filtrate—not quantity removed.

How Apheresis Could Remove Microplastics

Blood is drawn via one vein, passed through a membrane or adsorber system with pores ≤ 200 nanometres—small enough to trap nanoplastic structures. The filtered plasma, containing toxins and microplastic debris, is removed, and the cleaned blood components are returned to the patient.

The double‑filter system enhances the capture of very small particles such as polyamide and polyurethane fragments.

Potential Benefits for Chronic Fatigue and Beyond

Previously, anecdotal and observational reports from Germany suggested 70% of CFS/ME patients undergoing similar apheresis reported symptom improvements—less fatigue, better cognition and mood—though controlled trials remain limited.

While mechanisms aren’t fully understood, removal of microplastics, combined with reduction in inflammatory mediators or autoantibodies, may help reset systemic inflammation.

What We Don't Know Yet

• Quantity removed: No quantitative before/after blood measurements have been taken in current studies.
• Blood vs tissue burden: Even if blood is cleared, microplastics in organs may persist.
• Clinical benefit: Symptomatic improvements in fatigue may not correlate directly to plastic removal.
• Long-term effects: Costs, risks, and need for repeated sessions are still unknown.

Risks and Considerations of Apheresis

The procedure is generally safe when performed by professionals, but carries potential risks:

• Infection or hematoma at venous access points.
• Transient reductions in electrolytes or plasma proteins—often mitigated by nutrient reinfusion.
• Exposure to adsorber materials or tubing (e.g. DEHP plasticisers), though modern systems reduce risk.
• Need for medical oversight throughout the session.

Currently, apheresis for microplastic removal is experimental and not part of standard medical guidelines. It's offered privately in select European clinics.

Costs and Access

Sessions are time- and resource-intensive. Reports from London clinics indicate pricing around $12,600 per session. In Germany, INUSpheresis sessions last ~2.5 hours.

Repeated sessions—initial two sessions, with follow-ups every 6–9 months—add up quickly. Without insurance coverage, access is limited to those who can self‑fund.

Regulatory and Ethical Perspective

• Apheresis is approved for autoimmune conditions, lipid disorders, and some neurological cases—but not specifically for microplastic removal.
• Use for detox or environmental toxin removal is considered “off‑label” and often self‑pay without medical necessity coverage.
• Experts caution that the procedure should be carefully weighed against scientific evidence and cost-benefit considerations.

What Experts Are Saying

"This is the first clinical evidence that microplastic‑like particles can be extracted from blood via apheresis," say German researchers—though they emphasize the need for larger, controlled studies to validate findings.

“Filtering out microplastics may reduce systemic inflammation, but long-term benefits are unproven,” notes a specialist epidemiologist.

Future Research Directions

• Quantitative blood sampling: Before-and-after microplastic measurements using advanced techniques.
• Longitudinal studies: Tracking symptom changes and biomarkers over time.
• Control groups: Comparing apheresis against sham or standard care.
• Filter optimization: Evaluating pore sizes and adsorber materials for maximal removal.
• Health impacts: Defining effects in subgroups with fatigue, cardiovascular or neurological symptoms.

Alternative Strategies to Reduce Microplastic Exposure

Until clinical validation is available, public health experts recommend focusing on exposure reduction:

• Use clean water: filtered, not bottled.
• Avoid heating plastics; use natural fibers in textiles.
• Support air quality: reduce indoor dust, ventilate spaces.
• Eat whole foods, avoid processed packaging.
• Encourage wastewater filtration: evidence shows >94% removal using filters.

Environmental and Health Policy Implications

• Strengthen regulations reducing microplastic release from industry and packaging.
• Monitor human microplastic burdens in blood and tissues via biomonitoring initiatives.
• Invest in filtration infrastructure to limit airborne and waterborne microplastic exposure.
• Raise awareness: inform clinicians and the public about exposure routes and health implications.

Conclusion

The German study provides intriguing first evidence that therapeutic apheresis can capture microplastic-like particles from human blood, confirming feasibility though not yet proving health benefit or quantity removed.

Despite promising anecdotal improvements in chronic fatigue syndromes, the technique remains experimental, with significant gaps in dose–response data, long-term clinical impact, cost-effectiveness, and safety profile.

At present, publicly available health advice emphasizes reducing exposure to microplastics through lifestyle and environmental changes. However, the growing body of research is shifting attention toward proactive removal strategies like apheresis—paving the way for rigorously designed clinical trials.

With global microplastic exposure on the rise—and emerging evidence of human health effects—therapeutic apheresis may become an important tool in environmental medicine. For now, cautious optimism guides the conversation. We at betterhealthfacts.com will continue to cover this evolving frontier and bring you validated insights at the intersection of science, environment, and health.

For more trusted health science news and actionable guides, visit betterhealthfacts.com.