1.
Simultaneous Use of Hypertonic Saline and IV Furosemide for Fluid Overload: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Liu, C, Peng, Z, Gao, X, Gajic, O, Dong, Y, Prokop, LJ, Murad, MH, Kashani, KB, Domecq, JP
Critical care medicine. 2021;(11):e1163-e1175
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To evaluate the efficacy of the simultaneous hypertonic saline solution and IV furosemide (HSS+Fx) for patients with fluid overload compared with IV furosemide alone (Fx). DATA SOURCES Electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, PsycINFO, Scopus, and WOS) were searched from inception to March 2020. STUDY SELECTION Randomized controlled trials on the use of HSS+Fx in adult patients with fluid overload versus Fx were included. DATA EXTRACTION Data were collected on all-cause mortality, hospital length of stay, heart failure-related readmission, along with inpatient weight loss, change of daily diuresis, serum creatinine, and 24-hour urine sodium excretion from prior to post intervention. Pooled analysis with random effects models yielded relative risk or mean difference with 95% CIs. DATA SYNTHESIS Eleven randomized controlled trials comprising 2,987 acute decompensated heart failure patients were included. Meta-analysis demonstrated that HSS+Fx was associated with lower all-cause mortality (relative risk, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.46-0.67; p < 0.05; I2 = 12%) and heart failure-related readmissions (relative risk, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.33-0.76; p < 0.05; I2 = 61%), shorter hospital length of stay (mean difference, -3.28 d; 95% CI, -4.14 to -2.43; p < 0.05; I2 = 93%), increased daily diuresis (mean difference, 583.87 mL; 95% CI, 504.92-662.81; p < 0.05; I2 = 76%), weight loss (mean difference, -1.76 kg; 95% CI, -2.52 to -1.00; p < 0.05; I2 = 57%), serum sodium change (mean difference, 6.89 mEq/L; 95% CI, 4.98-8.79; p < 0.05; I2 = 95%), and higher 24-hour urine sodium excretion (mean difference, 61.10 mEq; 95% CI, 51.47-70.73; p < 0.05; I2 = 95%), along with decreased serum creatinine (mean difference, -0.46 mg/dL; 95% CI, -0.51 to -0.41; p < 0.05; I2 = 89%) when compared with Fx. The Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation certainty of evidence ranged from low to moderate. CONCLUSIONS Benefits of the HSS+Fx over Fx were observed across all examined outcomes in acute decompensated heart failure patients with fluid overload. There is at least moderate certainty that HSS+Fx is associated with a reduction in mortality in patients with acute decompensated heart failure. Factors associated with a successful HSS+Fx utilization are still unknown. Current evidence cannot be extrapolated to other than fluid overload states in acute decompensated heart failure.
2.
Meta-analysis of the effects of furosemide combined with hydration therapy on contrast-induced acute kidney injury after coronary intervention.
Hu, MJ, Luo, EF, Tang, CC, Wang, L, Zhang, QG, Gong, JB
European review for medical and pharmacological sciences. 2021;(14):4729-4737
Abstract
OBJECTIVE A meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the effect of furosemide combined with hydration therapy on the incidence and prognosis of contrast-induced acute kidney injury (CI-AKI) in patients after coronary intervention. MATERIALS AND METHODS Through the PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and Web of Science databases, all relevant literature from database establishment until October 1, 2020, was retrieved and screened. Quality evaluation was performed using the risk of bias evaluation tool recommended by the Cochrane Collaboration network, data extraction was performed based on pre-selected effect indicators, and statistics were calculated using Review Manager 5.3 analysis software. RESULTS A total of 2084 patients in 9 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The results showed that furosemide combined with hydrotherapy had no effect on the incidence of CI-AKI (OR = 0.85, 95% CI [0.46, 1.60], p = 0.62) and can significantly decrease the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) (OR = 0.43, 95% CI [0.27, 0.67], p = 0.0003) and mortality (OR = 0.24, 95% CI [0.08, 0.79], p = 0.02) in patients. However, it had no significant impact on the need for postoperative dialysis treatment, postoperative creatinine level or length of hospital stay. CONCLUSIONS Furosemide combined with hydration therapy has no significant effect on the incidence of CI-AKI in patients after coronary intervention but can reduce the incidence of MACEs and mortality, thereby providing clinical benefits.
3.
Meta-Analysis Comparing Torsemide Versus Furosemide in Patients With Heart Failure.
Abraham, B, Megaly, M, Sous, M, Fransawyalkomos, M, Saad, M, Fraser, R, Topf, J, Goldsmith, S, Simegn, M, Bart, B, et al
The American journal of cardiology. 2020;(1):92-99
Abstract
Although torsemide's oral bioavailability and half-life theoretically render it a more efficient diuretic than furosemide, the clinical outcomes of torsemide compared with furosemide remain unclear. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis, including all published studies that compared torsemide and furosemide use in heart failure patients from January 1996 through August 2019. Nineteen studies (9 randomized control trials [RCTs] and 10 observational studies) with a total of 19,280 patients were included. During a mean follow-up duration of 15 months, torsemide was associated with a numerically lower risk of hospitalization due to heart failure (10.6% vs 18.4%; odds ratio [OR] 0.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.51, 1.03], p = 0.07, I2 = 18%; number needed to treat [NNT] = 23) compared with furosemide. Torsemide was associated with statistically significant more improvement in functional status from New York Heart Association (NYHA) class III/IV to I/II (72.5% vs 58%; OR 2.32, 95% CI (1.32, 4.1), p = 0.004, I2 = 27%; NNT = 5) and lower risk of cardiac mortality (1.5% vs 4.4%; OR 0.37, 95% CI (0.20, 0.66), p <0.001, I2 = 0%, NNT = 40) compared with furosemide. However, there was no difference in all-cause mortality or medication side effects between the 2 groups. In conclusion, compared with furosemide, torsemide use was associated with significant more improvement in functional status and lower cardiac mortality; and numerically fewer hospitalizations in patients with heart failure.