Faculty Opinions recommendation of Loop diuretics, renal function and clinical outcome in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction.

Author(s):  
Lars C Huber
2015 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 328-336 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin Damman ◽  
John Kjekshus ◽  
John Wikstrand ◽  
John G.F. Cleland ◽  
Michel Komajda ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marvin Owusu-Ayeman ◽  
Xin He ◽  
Weihao Liang ◽  
Wengen Zhu ◽  
Yuzhong Wu ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Heart failure patients with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) have different sensitivity to plasma volume change after decongestion, but the possible differential effects of loop diuretics dosage on worsening renal function (WRF) in heart failure (HF) categories remain unclear. Methods In 972 patients with HFpEF and 427 patients with HFrEF, we assessed the risk of WRF with the average daily furosemide equivalent dose, using multivariable logistic regression. WRF was defined as an increase in serum creatinine levels of more than 26.5 mmol/L during hospitalization. Results In patients with HFpEF and HFrEF, between-group differences in average daily furosemide equivalent dose (18.9 mg/d vs. 26.8 mg/d) and the prevalence of WRF (25.3% vs. 14.3%) were significant (p < 0.001). In multivariable-adjusted analyses, a doubling of the average furosemide equivalent dose was associated with higher risk of WRF in all patients, patients with HFpEF and HFrEF, with odds ratios amounting to 1.42, 1.41 and 1.60 (p ≤ 0.022), respectively. There was no interaction between heart failure categories and average furosemide equivalent dose (p = 0.37). The adjusted odds ratios of risk of WRF associated with intravenous furosemide were 1.26 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.08–1.46; p = 0.002) in HFpEF but not significant in HFrEF(p = 0.099). Conclusions The risk of WRF was associated with higher furosemide dosage in both HF subtypes. Our observations highlight that close monitoring is required to prevent further renal impairment in all HF patients while using loop diuretics.


2018 ◽  
Vol 54 (6) ◽  
pp. 351-357 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian C. Bohn ◽  
Rim M. Hadgu ◽  
Hannah E. Pope ◽  
Jerrica E. Shuster

Background: Thiazide diuretics are often utilized to overcome loop diuretic resistance when treating acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF). In addition to a large cost advantage, several pharmacokinetic advantages exist when administering oral metolazone (MTZ) compared with intravenous (IV) chlorothiazide (CTZ), yet many providers are reluctant to utilize an oral formulation to treat ADHF. The purpose of this study was to compare the increase in 24-hour total urine output (UOP) after adding MTZ or CTZ to IV loop diuretics (LD) in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Methods and Results: From September 2013 to August 2016, 1002 patients admitted for ADHF received either MTZ or CTZ in addition to LD. Patients were excluded for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) (n = 469), <24-hour LD or UOP data prior to drug initiation (n = 129), or low dose MTZ/CTZ (n = 91). A total of 168 patients were included with 64% receiving CTZ. No significant difference was observed between the increase in 24-hour total UOP after MTZ or CTZ initiation (1458 [514, 2401] mL vs 1820 [890, 2750] mL, P = .251). Conclusions: Both MTZ and CTZ similarly increased UOP when utilized as an adjunct to IV LD. These results suggest that while thiazide agents can substantially increase UOP in ADHF patients with HFrEF, MTZ and CTZ have comparable effects.


2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Brahim Redouane ◽  
Stephen J. Greene ◽  
Marat Fudim ◽  
Muthiah Vaduganathan ◽  
Andrew P. Ambrosy ◽  
...  

Background: The FIGHT (Functional Impact of GLP-1 [glucagon-like peptide-1] for Heart Failure Treatment) trial randomized 300 patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and a recent hospitalization for heart failure to liraglutide versus placebo. While there was no difference in the primary outcome (rank score of time to death, time to rehospitalization for heart failure, and change in NT-proBNP [N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide]), there was a significant increase in cystatin C among patients randomized to liraglutide raising concern of adverse renal outcomes. We performed a post hoc analysis of FIGHT to investigate whether liraglutide was associated with worsening renal function (WRF). Methods: The relationship between randomization to liraglutide and WRF was evaluated using logistic regression models. Two hundred seventy-four patients (91%) had complete data to assess for WRF defined as: increase in SCr ≥0.3 mg/dL, or ≥25% decrease in estimated glomerular filtration rate, or an increase in cystatin C ≥0.3 mg/L from baseline to 180-days. Results: Patients with WRF (n=113, 41%), compared with those without, were older, had more comorbidities, and lower utilization of guideline-directed medical treatment. Logistic regression models showed that age and baseline cystatin C levels were associated with WRF. In adjusted models, liraglutide was not associated with excess risk of WRF compared with placebo (odds ratio, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.62–1.67]). There was also no difference in the rank score when WRF was added as a fourth-tier outcome. Conclusions: Liraglutide was not associated with WRF among patients with HFrEF and a recent hospitalization for heart failure. These data support the relative renal safety profile of liraglutide among patients with HFrEF. Registration: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01800968.


2018 ◽  
Vol 71 (11) ◽  
pp. A726
Author(s):  
Hesam Mostafavi Toroghi ◽  
Kevin Lo ◽  
Benjamin Horn ◽  
Napatt Kanjanahattakij ◽  
Erum Malik ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document