Loop Diuretics In Patients Research Articles

Association between the use of loop diuretics and prognosis in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury: a retrospective propensity score-matched cohort study.

The role of loop diuretics in patients with acute kidney injury (AKI) is controversial. This study examined the association between the use of loop diuretics and prognosis in critically ill patients with AKI. This study used data from the medical information mart for the intensive care IV database. Adult critically ill patients with AKI were included in the analysis. Patients were partitioned into two groups based on their use of loop diuretics in the ICU, and potentially confounding variables between the two groups were balanced using propensity score matching (PSM). We used time-dependent Cox proportional hazards regression, logistic regression, and Hodges-Lehman estimator to assess the impact of loop diuretics on all-cause mortality, renal replacement therapy (RRT) use, and the length of hospital stay, respectively. This study included a cohort of 19,671 patients. After PSM, both groups consisted of 6200 patients. The use of loop diuretics was associated with a lower risk of in-hospital mortality (HR, 0.672; 95% CI 0.597-0.757; P < 0.001), lower in-ICU mortality (HR, 0.375; 95% CI 0.315-0.446; P < 0.001), and lower odds of in-hospital RRT (OR, 0.472; 95% CI 0.400-0.555; P < 0.001). A sensitivity analysis using the original cohort (HR, 0.624; 95% CI 0.561-0.693; P < 0.001) and weighted cohort (HR, 0.654; 95% CI 0.582-0.736; P < 0.001) also demonstrated lower in-hospital all-cause mortality. The use of loop diuretics is associated with a substantial reduction in mortality among critically ill patients with AKI.

Comparison of Loop Diuretics in Patients with Acute Myeloid Leukemia and Differentiation Syndrome

Comparison of Loop Diuretics in Patients with Acute Myeloid Leukemia and Differentiation Syndrome

Diuretic use and outcomes in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: Insights from the VICTORIA trial.

In VICTORIA, vericiguat compared with placebo reduced the risk of cardiovascular death (CVD) and heart failure hospitalization (HFH) in patients enrolled after a worsening heart failure (WHF) event. We examined clinical outcomes and efficacy of vericiguat as it relates to background use of loop diuretics in patients with WHF. We calculated the total daily loop diuretic dose equivalent to furosemide dosing at randomization and categorized these as: no loop diuretic, 1-39, 41-80, 40, and >80 mg total daily dose (TDD). The primary composite outcome of CVD/HFH and its components were evaluated based on TDD loop diuretic and expressed as adjusted hazard ratios with 95% confidence intervals. Post-randomization rates of change in TDD were also examined. Of 4974 patients (98% of the trial) with diuretic dose information available at randomization, 540 (10.8%) were on no loop diuretic, 647 (13.0%) were on 1-39, 1633 (32.8%) were on 40, 1185 (23.8%) were on 41-80, and 969 (19.4%) were on >80 mg TDD. Patients with higher TDD had a higher rate of primary and secondary clinical outcomes. There were no significant interactions with TDD at randomization and efficacy of vericiguat versus placebo for any outcome (all pinteraction > 0.5). Post-randomization diuretic dose changes for vericiguat and placebo showed similar rates of up-titration (19.6 and 20.2/100 person-years), down-titration (16.8 and 18.1/100 person-years), and stopping diuretics (22.9 and 24.2/100 person-years). Loop diuretic TDD at randomization was independently associated with worse outcomes in this high-risk population. The efficacy of vericiguat was consistent across the range of diuretic doses.

Use of loop diuretics in patients with chronic heart failure: an observational overview

IntroductionThis study aimed to evaluate the use and dose of loop diuretics (LDs) across the entire ejection fraction (EF) spectrum in a large, ‘real-world’ cohort of chronic heart failure (HF)...

Fluid balance management with loop diuretics in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage treated with clazosentan: A case series

ObjectivePulmonary edema is a common complication in patients receiving clazonsentan. Here, we report our experience in managing fluid balance with loop diuretics in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH) treated with clazosentan. MethodsPatients with aSAH who received prophylactic agents for vasospasm after aneurysm obliteration between June 2021 and April 2023 were enrolled. Fluid balance parameters and asymptomatic and symptomatic vasospasm and pulmonary edema incidence were compared in three periods: 1st period (fasudil therapy), 2nd period (clazosentan therapy alone), and 3rd period (clazosentan with loop diuretic therapy). ResultsFluid intake and urine volume during the 2nd and 3rd periods were considerably lesser than those during the 1st period. Asymptomatic vasospasm incidence was considerably lesser in the 3rd period than that in the 1st and 2nd periods. However, the incidences of symptomatic vasospasm and rescue endovascular treatment were comparable among the three groups. Although the clinical outcomes at the last follow-up were comparable among the three groups, pulmonary edema incidence was markedly higher during the 2nd period than that in the 1st and 3rd periods. ConclusionThus, proper management of fluid balance with clazosentan and diuretics would help in effective clazosentan therapy for vasospasm prophylaxis.

A Narrative Review on the Efficacy and Safety of Loop Diuretics in Patients With Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction and Preserved Ejection Fraction.

To date, loop diuretics are the mainstay treatment for decongestion in patients with acute decompensated heart failure (HF). In clinical practice, loop diuretics have also been utilized for patients with chronic HF with reduced and preserved ejection fractions. There is a paucity of quality evidence of the effect of loop diuretics use and dosing on clinical outcomes in HF patients beyond symptomatic relief. In this review, we aimed to summarize recently published data on the use of loop diuretics in patients with HF, focusing on efficacy and safety outcomes in patients with HF with reduced and preserved ejection fraction. We searched EMBASE, PubMed, CINAHL, and the "Web of Science" databases. Cohort studies and randomized controlled trials published after 2018 and written in English were included in this review. Case reports, case series, cross-sectional studies, review articles, commentaries, articles published more than five years ago, and studies involving children were excluded. Results were divided into the efficacy and safety of loop diuretics in HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Aregistry-based study included in our reviewobserveda reduced 30-day all-cause mortality in patients with HFrEF receiving loop diuretics compared to those not receiving loop diuretics (HR=0.73; 95% CI=0.57-0.94; p=0.016), but there was no statistically significant association at the 60-day follow-up of the same group of patients. Most studies reviewed showed that the choice of loop diuretics did not influence clinical outcomes such as mortality and HF rehospitalization in patients with HF with reduced and preserved ejection fraction despite differences in oral bioavailability and half-life. Studies have consistently shown that patients with HF who receive a higher dose of loop diuretics are likely to experience a decline in renal function and hypotension, regardless of their type of HF. Discontinuation or reduction of the dose of loop diuretics should be considered in patients with HF after decongestion.

Combining loop and thiazide diuretics for acute heart failure across the estimated glomerular filtration rate spectrum: A post-hoc analysis of the CLOROTIC trial.

In patients with acute heart failure (AHF), the addition of hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) to furosemide improved diuretic response in the CLOROTIC trial. This work aimed to evaluate if these effects differ across the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) spectrum. This post-hoc analysis of the CLOROTIC trial analysed 230 patients with AHF and explored the influence of eGFR on primary and secondary endpoints. The median eGFR was 43 ml/min/1.73 m2 (range 14-109) and 23% had eGFR ≥60 ml/min/1.73 m2 (group 1), 24% from 45 to 59 ml/min/1.73 m2 (group 2), and 53% <45 ml/min/1.73 m2 (group 3). Patients treated with HCTZ had greatest weight loss at 72 h in all three groups, but patients in group 1 had a significantly greater response (-2.1 kg [-3.0 to 0.5]), compared to patients in groups 2 (-1.3 kg [-2.3 to 0.2]) and 3 (-0.1 kg [-1.3 to 0.4]) (p-value for interaction = 0.246). At 96 h, the differences in weight were -1.8 kg (-3.0 to -0.3), -1.4 kg (-2.6 to 0.3), and -0.5 kg (-1.3 to -0.1) in groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively (p-value for interaction = 0.256). There were no significant differences observed with the addition of HCTZ in terms of diuretic response, mortality or rehospitalizations, or safety endpoints (impaired renal function, hyponatraemia, and hypokalaemia) among the three eGFR groups (all p-values for interaction were no significant). The addition of eGFR-adjusted doses of oral HCTZ to loop diuretics in patients with AHF improved diuretic response across the eGFR spectrum. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01647932; EudraCT number: 2013-001852-36.

Sacubitril/Valsartan Does Not Change the Use and Dose of Loop Diuretics in Patients With Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction

Background: There is no standard approach for managing the use or dose of loop diuretics after initiating sacubitril/valsartan. Objective: To investigate longitudinal trends in loop diuretic therapy use and doses during the initial 6 months following sacubitril/valsartan initiation. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included adult patients who were initiated on sacubitril/valsartan in cardiology clinics. Inclusion criteria were patients diagnosed with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (ejection fraction ≤40%) and initiated on sacubitril/valsartan in an outpatient setting. We investigated longitudinal trends in the prevalence of loop diuretic use and furosemide equivalent dose at baseline, 2 weeks, 1 month, 3 month and 6 months following sacubitril/valsartan initiation. Results: A total of 427 patients were included in the final cohort. Compared to the baseline loop diuretic use and dose, there were no significant longitudinal changes in the prevalence of loop diuretic use or the furosemide equivalent dose over the 6 months following sacubitril/valsartan initiation. The use of sacubitril/valsartan was not significantly associated with reductions in the use or dose of loop diuretics over a 6-month follow-up period. Conclusion: The use of sacubitril/valsartan did not significantly change the use or dose of loop diuretics over 6-month follow-up period. Initiation of sacubitril/valsartan may not need a pre-emptive loop diuretic dose reduction.

Effect of Torsemide vs Furosemide After Discharge on All-Cause Mortality in Patients Hospitalized With Heart Failure

Although furosemide is the most commonly used loop diuretic in patients with heart failure, some studies suggest a potential benefit for torsemide. To determine whether torsemide results in decreased mortality compared with furosemide among patients hospitalized for heart failure. TRANSFORM-HF was an open-label, pragmatic randomized trial that recruited 2859 participants hospitalized with heart failure (regardless of ejection fraction) at 60 hospitals in the United States. Recruitment occurred from June 2018 through March 2022, with follow-up through 30 months for death and 12 months for hospitalizations. The final date for follow-up data collection was July 2022. Loop diuretic strategy of torsemide (n = 1431) or furosemide (n = 1428) with investigator-selected dosage. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality in a time-to-event analysis. There were 5 secondary outcomes with all-cause mortality or all-cause hospitalization and total hospitalizations assessed over 12 months being highest in the hierarchy. The prespecified primary hypothesis was that torsemide would reduce all-cause mortality by 20% compared with furosemide. TRANSFORM-HF randomized 2859 participants with a median age of 65 years (IQR, 56-75), 36.9% were women, and 33.9% were Black. Over a median follow-up of 17.4 months, a total of 113 patients (53 [3.7%] in the torsemide group and 60 [4.2%] in the furosemide group) withdrew consent from the trial prior to completion. Death occurred in 373 of 1431 patients (26.1%) in the torsemide group and 374 of 1428 patients (26.2%) in the furosemide group (hazard ratio, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.89-1.18]). Over 12 months following randomization, all-cause mortality or all-cause hospitalization occurred in 677 patients (47.3%) in the torsemide group and 704 patients (49.3%) in the furosemide group (hazard ratio, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.83-1.02]). There were 940 total hospitalizations among 536 participants in the torsemide group and 987 total hospitalizations among 577 participants in the furosemide group (rate ratio, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.84-1.07]). Results were similar across prespecified subgroups, including among patients with reduced, mildly reduced, or preserved ejection fraction. Among patients discharged after hospitalization for heart failure, torsemide compared with furosemide did not result in a significant difference in all-cause mortality over 12 months. However, interpretation of these findings is limited by loss to follow-up and participant crossover and nonadherence. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03296813.

Science, Medicine, and the Anesthesiologist

Science, Medicine, and the Anesthesiologist

Nordic survey on assessment and treatment of fluid overload in intensive care.

Fluid overload in patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) is associated with higher mortality. There are few randomized controlled trials to guide physicians in treating patients with fluid overload in the ICU, and no guidelines exist. We aimed to elucidate how ICU physicians from Nordic countries define, assess, and treat fluid overload in the ICU. We developed an online questionnaire with 18 questions. The questions were pre-tested and revised by specialists in intensive care medicine. Through a network of national coordinators. The survey was distributed to a wide range of Nordic ICU physicians. The distribution started on January 5th, 2022 and ended on May 6th, 2022. We received a total of 1,066 responses from Denmark, Norway, Finland, Sweden, and Iceland. When assessing fluid status, respondents applied clinical parameters such as clinical examination findings, cumulative fluid balance, body weight, and urine output more frequently than cardiac/lung ultrasound, radiological appearances, and cardiac output monitoring. A large proportion of the respondents agreed that a 5% increase or more in body weight from baseline supported the diagnosis of fluid overload. The preferred de-resuscitation strategy was diuretics (91%), followed by minimization of maintenance (76%) and resuscitation fluids (71%). The majority declared that despite mild hypotension, mild hypernatremia, and ongoing vasopressor, they would not withhold treatment of fluid overload and would continue diuretics. The respondents were divided when it came to treating fluid overload with loop diuretics in patients receiving noradrenaline. Around 1% would not administer noradrenaline and diuretics simultaneously and 35% did not have a fixed upper limit for the dosage. The remaining respondents 63% reported different upper limits of noradrenaline infusion (0.05-0.50 mcg/kg/min) when administering loop diuretics. Self-reported practices among Nordic ICU physicians when assessing, diagnosing, and treating fluid overload reveals variability in the practice. A 5% increase in body weight was considered a minimum to support the diagnosis of fluid overload. Clinical examination findings were preferred for assessing, diagnosing and treating fluid overload, and diuretics were the preferred treatment modality.

Decongestion With Acetazolamide in Acute Decompensated Heart Failure Across the Spectrum of Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction: A Prespecified Analysis From the ADVOR Trial.

Acetazolamide inhibits proximal tubular sodium reabsorption and improved decongestion in the ADVOR (Acetazolamide in Decompensated Heart Failure with Volume Overload) trial. It remains unclear whether the decongestive effects of acetazolamide differ across the spectrum of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). This is a prespecified analysis of the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled ADVOR trial that enrolled 519 patients with acute heart failure (HF), clinical signs of volume overload (eg, edema, pleural effusion, or ascites), NTproBNP (N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide) >1000 ng/L, or BNP (B-type natriuretic peptide) >250 ng/mL to receive intravenous acetazolamide (500 mg once daily) or placebo in addition to standardized intravenous loop diuretics (twice that of the oral home maintenance dose). Randomization was stratified according to LVEF (≤40% or >40%). The primary end point was successful decongestion, defined as the absence of signs of volume overload within 3 days from randomization without the need for mandatory escalation of decongestive therapy because of poor urine output. Median LVEF was 45% (25th to 75th percentile; 30% to 55%), and 43% had an LVEF ≤40%. Patients with lower LVEF were younger and more likely to be male with a higher prevalence of ischemic heart disease, higher NTproBNP, less atrial fibrillation, and lower estimated glomerular filtration rate. No interaction on the overall beneficial treatment effect of acetazolamide to the primary end point of successful decongestion (OR, 1.77 [95% CI, 1.18-2.63]; P=0.005; all P values for interaction >0.401) was found when LVEF was assessed per randomization stratum (≤40% or >40%), or as HF with reduced ejection fraction, HF with mildly reduced ejection fraction, and HF with preserved ejection fraction, or on a continuous scale. Acetazolamide resulted in improved diuretic response measured by higher cumulative diuresis and natriuresis and shortened length of stay without treatment effect modification by baseline LVEF (all P values for interaction >0.160). When added to treatment with loop diuretics in patients with acute decompensated HF, acetazolamide improves the incidence of successful decongestion and diuretic response, and shortens length of stay without treatment effect modification by baseline LVEF. URL: https://www. gov; Unique identifier: NCT03505788.

Effects of Early Empagliflozin Initiation on Diuresis and Kidney Function in Patients With Acute Decompensated Heart Failure (EMPAG-HF).

Effective diuretic regimens using loop diuretics in patients with acute decompensated heart failure are often limited by the development of worsening kidney function. Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors induce glucosuria and sodium excretion with nephroprotective effects in patients with stable heart failure but their role in acute decompensated heart failure is unclear. In this single-center, prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized study, we randomly assigned patients with acute decompensated heart failure to empagliflozin 25 mg daily or placebo in addition to standard decongestive treatments that included loop diuretics. The primary end point was cumulative urine output over 5 days. Secondary end points included diuretic efficiency, dynamics in markers of kidney function and injury, and NT-proBNP (N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide). Sixty patients were randomized within 12 hours of hospitalization for acute decompensated heart failure. Addition of empagliflozin daily to standard medical treatment of acute decompensated heart failure resulted in a 25% increase in cumulative urine output over 5 days (median 10.8 versus 8.7 L mL in placebo, group difference estimation 2.2 L [95% CI, 8.4 to 3.6]; P=0.003). Empagliflozin increased diuretic efficiency compared with placebo (14.1 mL urine per milligram furosemide equivalent [95% CI, 0.6-27.7]; P=0.041) without affecting markers of renal function (estimated glomerular filtration rate, 51±19 versus 54±17 mL/min per 1.73 m²; P=0.599) or injury (total urinary protein, 492±845 versus 503±847 mg/g creatinine; P=0.975; and urinary α1-microglobulin, 55.4±38.6 versus 31.3±33.6 mg/g creatinine; P=0.066) with more pronounced decrease in NT-proBNP in the empagliflozin group compared with placebo (-1861 versus -727.2 pg/mL after 5 days; quotient in slope, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.83-0.95]; P<0.001). There were no differences in the incidence of safety events between groups. Early addition of empagliflozin to standard diuretic therapy increases urine output without affecting renal function in patients with acute decompensated heart failure. URL: https://www. gov; Unique identifier: NCT04049045.

Revisiting diuretic choice in chronic kidney disease.

Existing guidelines offer little direction about the use of thiazide and loop diuretics in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). This review summarizes recent studies impacting indications and safety considerations for these agents in patients with CKD. Chlorthalidone reduces blood pressure compared to placebo in patients with advanced CKD, challenging the belief that thiazide diuretics lose efficacy at lower glomerular filtration rates (GFR). Existing studies show no clear impact of thiazide or loop diuretic use on kidney or cardiovascular outcomes in patients with CKD. Sodium-glucose co-transporter type 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors have diuretic effects, but concomitant use of a diuretic does not diminish the preventive benefits of these agents against acute kidney injury (AKI). Despite theoretical concerns, thiazide diuretics likely do not worsen circulating vasopressin levels or cyst progression in polycystic kidney disease and may be useful for alleviating polyuria from tolvaptan. Diuretics cause multiple adverse effects, including electrolyte abnormalities, hemodynamic-mediated decrease in estimated GFR, and AKI. Recent evidence supports expanded indications for diuretics in patients with kidney disease, including chlorthalidone for hypertension in advanced CKD. Monitoring electrolytes and estimated GFR is critical to ensure patient safety when prescribing these agents for patients with CKD.

Chlorthalidone and Advanced Chronic Kidney Disease.

Chlorthalidone and Advanced Chronic Kidney Disease.

Fluid Retention In The Pulmonary Circulation As A Cause Of Pulmonary Vein Dilatation And Atrial Fibrillation Development In Chronic Heart Failure Patients

Objective — The study objective was to perform a transthoracic echocardiographic study of the remodeling of the left atrium and the maximum and minimum diameters of pulmonary veins, as well as remodeling regression in the process of heart failure treatment, in patients with chronic heart failure (CHF) and different forms of atrial fibrillation (AF). Material and Methods — The prospective study included patients having CHF with paroxysmal AF (n=38) and permanent AF (n=36) and without arrhythmia (n=225); the patients had their maximum and minimum diameters of the pulmonary vein measured, additionally to the standard echocardiographic protocol, before and after six months of standard therapy including a loop diuretic. Results — Structural changes in the left atrium and pulmonary veins of patients with CHF having permanent atrial fibrillation were significantly more distinct than those in patients with paroxysmal AF, in patients without arrhythmia, and in the control group. A decrease in the maximum and minimum diameters of the pulmonary vein followed by termination of AF attacks within a year of observation was detected after CHF treatment with a loop diuretic in patients with paroxysmal AF and permanent AF. Conclusion — Prescribing loop diuretics to patients with pulmonary vein dilatation detected during transthoracic echocardiography in subjects with paroxysmal AF and permanent AF results in a decrease in PV diameters and termination of AF attacks in paroxysmal AF.

Continuity of GP care for patients with dementia: impact on prescribing and the health of patients

BackgroundHigher continuity of GP care (CGPC), that is, consulting the same doctor consistently, can improve doctor–patient relationships and increase quality of care; however, its effects on patients with dementia are mostly unknown.AimTo estimate the associations between CGPC and potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP), and with the incidence of adverse health outcomes (AHOs) in patients with dementia.Design and settingA retrospective cohort study with 1 year of follow-up anonymised medical records from 9324 patients with dementia, aged ≥65 years living in England in 2016.MethodCGPC measures include the Usual Provider of Care (UPC), Bice–Boxerman Continuity of Care (BB), and Sequential Continuity (SECON) indices. Regression models estimated associations with PIPs and survival analysis with incidence of AHOs during the follow-up adjusted for age, sex, deprivation level, 14 comorbidities, and frailty.ResultsThe highest quartile (HQ) of UPC (highest continuity) had 34.8% less risk of delirium (odds ratio [OR] 0.65, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.51 to 0.84), 57.9% less risk of incontinence (OR 0.42, 95% CI = 0.31 to 0.58), and 9.7% less risk of emergency admissions to hospital (OR 0.90, 95% CI = 0.82 to 0.99) compared with the lowest quartile. Polypharmacy and PIP were identified in 81.6% (n = 7612) and 75.4% (n = 7027) of patients, respectively. The HQ had fewer prescribed medications (HQ: mean 8.5, lowest quartile (LQ): mean 9.7, P<0.01) and had fewer PIPs (HQ: mean 2.1, LQ: mean 2.5, P<0.01), including fewer loop diuretics in patients with incontinence, drugs that can cause constipation, and benzodiazepines with high fall risk. The BB and SECON measures produced similar findings.ConclusionHigher CGPC for patients with dementia was associated with safer prescribing and lower rates of major adverse events. Increasing continuity of care for patients with dementia may help improve treatment and outcomes.

Less loop diuretic use in patients on sacubitril/valsartan undergoing remote pulmonary artery pressure monitoring.

AimsControl of pulmonary pressures monitored remotely reduced heart failure hospitalizations mainly by lowering filling pressures through the use of loop diuretics. Sacubitril/valsartan improves heart failure outcomes and increases the kidney sensitivity for diuretics. We explored whether sacubitril/valsartan is associated with less utilization of loop diuretics in patients guided with haemodynamic monitoring in the CardioMEMS European Monitoring Study for Heart Failure (MEMS‐HF).Methods and resultsThe MEMS‐HF population (n = 239) was separated by the use of sacubitril/valsartan (n = 68) or no use of it (n = 164). Utilization of diuretics and their doses was prespecified in the protocol and was monitored in both groups. Multivariable regression, ANCOVA, and a generalized linear model were used to fit baseline covariates with furosemide equivalents and changes for 12 months. MEMS‐HF participants (n = 239) were grouped in sacubitril/valsartan users [n = 68, 64 ± 11 years, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 25 ± 9%, cardiac index (CI) 1.89 ± 0.4 L/min/m2] vs. non‐users (n = 164, 70 ± 10 years, LVEF 36 ± 16%, CI 2.11 ± 0.58 L/min/m2, P = 0.0002, P < 0.0001, and P = 0.0015, respectively). In contrast, mean pulmonary artery pressure (PAP) values were comparable between groups (29 ± 11 vs. 31 ± 11 mmHg, P = 0.127). Utilization of loop diuretics was lower in patients taking sacubitril/valsartan compared with those without (P = 0.01). Significant predictor of loop diuretic use was a history of renal failure (P = 0.005) but not age (P = 0.091). After subjects were stratified by sacubitril/valsartan or other diuretic use, PAP was nominally, but not significantly lower in sacubitril/valsartan‐treated patients (baseline: P = 0.52; 6 months: P = 0.07; 12 months: P = 0.53), while there was no difference in outcome or PAP changes. This difference was observed despite lower CI (P = 0.0015). Comparable changes were not observed for other non‐loop diuretics (P = 0.21).ConclusionsIn patients whose treatment was guided by remote PAP monitoring, concomitant use of sacubitril/valsartan was associated with reduced utilization of loop diuretics, which could potentially be relevant for outcomes.

Effects of Metolazone Administration on Congestion, Diuretic Response and Renal Function in Patients with Advanced Heart Failure.

Background: Advanced heart failure (HF) is a condition often requiring elevated doses of loop diuretics. Therefore, these patients often experience poor diuretic response. Both conditions have a detrimental impact on prognosis and hospitalization. Aims: This retrospective, multicenter study evaluates the effect of the addition of oral metolazone on diuretic response (DR), clinical congestion, NTproBNP values, and renal function over hospitalization phase. Follow-up analysis for a 6-month follow-up period was performed. Methods: We enrolled 132 patients with acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) in advanced NYHA class with reduced ejection fraction (EF < 40%) taking a mean furosemide amount of 250 ± 120 mg/day. Sixty-five patients received traditional loop diuretic treatment plus metolazone (Group M). The mean dose ranged from 7.5 to 15 mg for one week. Sixty-seven patients continued the furosemide (Group F). Congestion score was evaluated according to the ESC recommendations. DR was assessed by the formula diuresis/40 mg of furosemide. Results: Patients in Group M and patients in Group F showed a similar prevalence of baseline clinical congestion (3.1 ± 0.7 in Group F vs. 3 ± 0.8 in Group M) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) (51% in Group M vs. 57% in Group F; p = 0.38). Patients in Group M experienced a better congestion score at discharge compared to patients in Group F (C score: 1 ± 1 in Group M vs. 3 ± 1 in Group F p > 0.05). Clinical congestion resolution was also associated with weight reduction (−6 ± 2 in Group M vs. −3 ± 1 kg in Group F, p < 0.05). Better DR response was observed in Group M compared to F (940 ± 149 mL/40 mgFUROSEMIDE/die vs. 541 ± 314 mL/40 mgFUROSEMIDE/die; p < 0.01), whereas median ΔNTproBNP remained similar between the two groups (−4819 ± 8718 in Group M vs. −3954 ± 5560 pg/mL in Group F NS). These data were associated with better daily diuresis during hospitalization in Group M (2820 ± 900 vs. 2050 ± 1120 mL p < 0.05). No differences were found in terms of WRF development and electrolyte unbalance at discharge, although Group M had a significant saline solution administration during hospitalization. Follow-up analysis did not differ between the group but a reduced trend for recurrent hospitalization was observed in the M group (26% vs. 38%). Conclusions: Metolazone administration could be helpful in patients taking an elevated loop diuretics dose. Use of thiazide therapy is associated with better decongestion and DR. Current findings could suggest positive insights due to the reduced amount of loop diuretics in patients with advanced HF.

Диуретики в современной нефрологии

В работе рассмотрена проблема использования петлевых диуретиков у пациентов с хронической болезнью почек, которая сочетается с кардиоваскулярными рисками, а именно: сердечной недостаточностью, артериальной гипертензией, отечным синдромом, в том числе на фоне сахарного диабета. Представлены три терапевтических интервала торасемида и ксипамида, который можно добавлять к торасемиду для усиления диуретического эффекта. Приведены схемы их назначения и дозировки торасемида. На конкретных клинических примерах определены причины и клинические ситуации задержки жидкости при болезнях почек, освещена роль задержки жидкости в формировании кардиоваскулярных осложнений. Дана сравнительная характеристика эффективности различных доз торасемида, которые чаще всего используются в современной нефрологии. Рассмотрены практика и особенности их назначения в отдельных нефрологических ситуациях, последовательность и комплексность в формировании терапевтического эффекта в зависимости от гидратации пациента, данных биоимпеданса и диагноза. Проанализирован терапевтический подход согласно современным руководствам по сердечной недостаточности. Подчеркнута необходимость подбора дозы торасемида для достижения адекватного диуреза. Обращается внимание на возможность непрерывного назначения торасемида у пациентов, имеющих высокие значения натрийуретического пептида. В других клинических ситуациях использования торасемида требовалось прерывистое его назначение по причине формирования резистентности к его применению. Подчеркнута необходимость поддержания нормонатриемии у пациентов, длительно получающих диуретики. Указаны частые побочные действия диуретиков, возможность их избегания и коррекции. Представлены показатели, которые требуют контроля при назначении диуретиков. В конце статьи даны практические рекомендации для врачей, которые позволят обоснованно назначать петлевые диуретики, в частности торасемид. Акцентировано внимание на широком диапазоне дозирования торасемида в зависимости от клинической ситуации и расчетной скорости клубочковой фильтрации пациента с хронической болезнью почек и сопутствующими клиническими состояниями. Рекомендовано преимущественное применение торасемида, ксипамида, антагонистов альдостерона.