-
1.
Acute kidney injury.
Reis, T
Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992). 2020;(Suppl 1):s68-s74
-
2.
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.
-
3.
High-volume forced diuresis with matched hydration using the RenalGuard System to prevent contrast-induced nephropathy: A meta-analysis of randomized trials.
Shah, R, Wood, SJ, Khan, SA, Chaudhry, A, Rehan Khan, M, Morsy, MS
Clinical cardiology. 2017;(12):1242-1246
Abstract
BACKGROUND Contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN) is a well-recognized complication of coronary angiography that is associated with poor outcomes. Several small randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have recently shown that in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD), furosemide-induced forced diuresis with matched hydration using the RenalGuard system can prevent its occurrence. However, individual studies have been underpowered and thus cannot show significant differences in major clinical endpoints. HYPOTHESIS Forced diuresis with matched hydration using the RenalGuard system improves clinical outcomes in patients undergoing coronary angiography. METHODS Scientific databases and websites were searched for relevant RCTs. The pooled risk ratios were calculated using random-effects models. The primary endpoint was CIN, and the secondary endpoints were major adverse clinical events (MACEs) and the need for renal replacement therapy. RESULTS Data from 3 trials including 586 patients were analyzed. High-volume forced diuresis with matched hydration using the RenalGuard system decreased risk of CIN by 60% (risk ratio: 0.40, 95% confidence interval: 0.25 to 0.65, P < 0.001), MACE rate by 59%, and the need for renal replacement therapy by 78%, compared with the standard of care. CONCLUSIONS In patients with CKD undergoing coronary angiography, high-volume forced diuresis with matched hydration using the RenalGuard system significantly reduces the risk of CIN, MACE rate, and the need for renal replacement therapy. Larger RCTs with sufficient power are needed to confirm these findings.
-
4.
Does Long-Term Furosemide Therapy Cause Thiamine Deficiency in Patients with Heart Failure? A Focused Review.
Katta, N, Balla, S, Alpert, MA
The American journal of medicine. 2016;(7):753.e7-753.e11
Abstract
Diuretic therapy is a cornerstone in the management of heart failure. Most studies assessing body thiamine status have reported variable degrees of thiamine deficiency in patients with heart failure, particularly those treated chronically with high doses of furosemide. Thiamine deficiency in patients with heart failure seems predominantly to be due to increased urine volume and urinary flow rate. There is also evidence that furosemide may directly inhibit thiamine uptake at the cellular level. Limited data suggest that thiamine supplementation is capable of increasing left ventricular ejection fraction and improving functional capacity in patients with heart failure and a reduced left ventricular ejection fraction who were treated with diuretics (predominantly furosemide). Therefore, it may be reasonable to provide such patients with thiamine supplementation during heart failure exacerbations.
-
5.
Loop diuretics for patients receiving blood transfusions.
Sarai, M, Tejani, AM
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2015;(2):CD010138
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND Blood transfusions are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Prophylactic administration of loop diuretics (furosemide, bumetanide, ethacrynic acid, or torsemide) is common practice, especially among people who are at risk for circulatory overload, pulmonary oedema or both. OBJECTIVES This review aimed to determine if the prophylactic administration of loop diuretics (furosemide, bumetanide, ethacrynic acid, or torsemide) provides a therapeutic advantage (that is, a favourable risk benefit ratio) in adults and children who are recipients of any blood product transfusion versus placebo, no treatment, or general fluid restriction measures. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Renal Group's Specialised Register to 13 January 2015 through contact with the Trials' Search Co-ordinator using search terms relevant to this review. SELECTION CRITERIA All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs assessing a loop diuretic in patients receiving any blood transfusion were considered for inclusion. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two authors independently assessed study quality and extracted data. Study authors were contacted for additional information. Results were to be expressed as risk ratios (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous outcomes, and mean difference (MD) and 95% CI for continuous outcomes. Mean effect sizes were to be calculated using the random-effects models. MAIN RESULTS We included four studies that involved 100 participants. Furosemide was the only diuretic investigated in all four studies.None of the included studies assessed the clinically important outcomes noted in our protocol. The studies focused on various markers of respiratory function. An improvement in fraction of inspired oxygen (in favour of furosemide) was noted in one study. An improvement in pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (in favour of furosemide) was noted in two studies. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS There was insufficient evidence to determine whether premedicating people undergoing blood transfusion with loop diuretics prevents clinically important transfusion-related morbidity. Due to the continued use of prophylactic loop diuretics during transfusions, and because this review highlights the absence of evidence to justify this practice, well-conducted RCTs are needed. Given the high mortality, severe morbidity and increasing incidence of transfusion-associated circulatory overload, determining the therapeutic utility of pre-transfusion loop diuresis is an urgent need.
-
6.
Hypertonic saline with furosemide for the treatment of acute congestive heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Gandhi, S, Mosleh, W, Myers, RB
International journal of cardiology. 2014;(2):139-45
Abstract
BACKGROUND Advanced congestive heart failure (CHF) therapies include intravenous inotropic agents, change in class of diuretics, and venous ultrafiltration or hemodialysis. These modalities have not been associated with improved prognosis and are limited by availability and cost. Compared to high-dose furosemide alone, concomitant hypertonic saline solution (HSS) administration has demonstrated improved clinical outcomes with good safety profile. METHODS A literature search was conducted for randomized controlled trials that investigated the use of HSS in patients admitted to hospital with acute CHF. RESULTS 1032 patients treated with HSS and 1032 controls, demonstrated decreased all-cause mortality in patients treat with HSS with RR of 0.56 (95% CI 0.41-0.76,p=0.0003). 1012 patients treated with HSS and 1020 controls, demonstrated decreased heart failure hospital readmission with RR of 0.50 (95% CI 0.33-0.76,p=0.001). Patients treated with HSS also demonstrated decreased hospital length of stay (p=0.0002), greater weight loss (p<0.00001), and preservation of renal function (p<0.00001). CONCLUSION The results of this meta-analysis demonstrate that in patients with advanced CHF concomitant hypertonic saline administration improved weight loss, preserved renal function, and decreased length of hospitalization, mortality and heart failure rehospitalization. A future adequately powered, multi-centre, placebo controlled, randomized, double dummy, blinded trial is needed to assess the benefit of hypertonic saline in patients with renal dysfunction, in diverse patient populations, as well using a patient population on optimal current heart failure treatment. Pending further validation, there is promise for hypertonic saline as an advanced therapy for the management of acute advanced CHF.
-
7.
Continuous infusion versus intermittent bolus furosemide in ADHF: an updated meta-analysis of randomized control trials.
Amer, M, Adomaityte, J, Qayyum, R
Journal of hospital medicine. 2012;(3):270-5
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Administering intermittent boluses of furosemide to patients with acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) often leads to unfavorable hemodynamic changes. Continuous infusion may induce similar or greater diuresis without adverse hemodynamic consequences. We conducted a systemic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials that compared the effects of continuous infusion and intermittent bolus of furosemide in patients hospitalized with ADHF. METHODS We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases from their inception until March 2011. Two investigators independently abstracted data on study characteristics, quality, and selected outcomes. Differences between investigators were resolved by mutual consensus. Comparisons were reported as the weighted mean difference (WMDs). RESULTS Ten trials involving a total of 564 patients were included. When administered as a continuous infusion, furosemide resulted in greater diuresis (WMD, -240.54 mL/24 hours/100 mg furosemide; 95% confidence interval [CI], -462.42 to -18.66) and reduction in total body weight (WMD, -0.78 kg; 95% CI, -1.54 to -0.03), than when administered in intermittent boluses. Urinary sodium excretion (WMD, -20.26 mmol/24 hours; 95% CI, -60.48 to 19.96) and duration of hospital stay (WMD, 0.99 days; 95% CI, -2.08 to 4.06) were not different between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION This meta-analysis showed statistical support for administering furosemide as a continuous infusion for greater diuresis and reduction in total body weight in patients hospitalized with ADHF. With the exception of greater diuresis, available data are homogenous for the reported outcomes but lack information on clinical endpoints. Larger studies are needed to provide robust recommendations for clinical practice.
-
8.
Diuretic dosing in acute decompensated heart failure: lessons from DOSE.
Campbell, PT, Ryan, J
Current heart failure reports. 2012;(3):260-5
Abstract
The mainstay of treatment for acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) is intravenous (IV) diuretic therapy either as a bolus or via continuous infusion. Despite being available for decades, few randomized trials exist to guide dosing and administration of these drugs. In 2011, the Diuretic Optimization Strategies Evaluation (DOSE) trial used a prospective, randomized design to compare bolus versus continuous infusion of IV furosemide, as well as high-dose versus low-dose therapy. The study found no difference in the primary end point for continuous versus bolus infusion. High-dose diuretics were more effective than low dose without clinically important negative effects on renal function. Although limited by patient selection criteria and protocol design, the study challenges long-held beliefs that continuous infusion is more effective than bolus dosing. The study also challenges the notion that high-dose diuretics carry clinically important renal toxicity risks for patients.
-
9.
Does perioperative furosemide usage reduce the need for renal replacement therapy in cardiac surgery patients?
Gandhi, A, Husain, M, Salhiyyah, K, Raja, SG
Interactive cardiovascular and thoracic surgery. 2012;(4):750-5
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
A best evidence topic was constructed according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was 'Does perioperative furosemide usage reduce the need for renal replacement therapy in cardiac surgery patients?' Forty-seven papers were found using the reported search, of which 10 represented the best evidence to answer the clinical question. The authors, journal, date and country of publication, patient group studied, study type, relevant outcomes and results of these papers are tabulated. Current best available evidence to resolve the issue includes a systematic review and nine randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The systematic review of seven RCTs and one observational study has demonstrated that in patients who have undergone cardiac surgery, a more consistent and sustained diuresis is produced by a continuous infusion of furosemide compared with intermittent bolus doses of furosemide. However, there does not appear to be a significant difference in the total urine output or a change in serum electrolyte levels when furosemide is administered as a continuous infusion compared with intermittent bolus doses. Three RCTs recruiting neonatal and paediatric patients after open heart surgery also validated the safety and efficacy of furosemide infusion as well as intermittent bolus doses. Two of the five RCTS in adult cardiac surgery patients showed that furosemide infusion was associated with a reduced need for renal replacement therapy (RRT), while two RCTs failed to show any benefit and one reported an increased incidence of renal impairment. We conclude that continuous furosemide infusion in the perioperative period promotes a gentle and sustained diuresis in cardiac surgery patients. The evidence supporting the benefit of this strategy in terms of reducing the need for RRT is weak. At the same time, current best available evidence, albeit from small RCTs, suggests that the timely introduction of continuous furosemide infusion does not increase the incidence of renal impairment after cardiac surgery.
-
10.
Nebulized furosemide for the management of dyspnea: does the evidence support its use?
Newton, PJ, Davidson, PM, Macdonald, P, Ollerton, R, Krum, H
Journal of pain and symptom management. 2008;(4):424-41
Abstract
Dyspnea is a common and distressing symptom associated with multiple chronic illnesses and high levels of burden for individuals, their families and health care systems. The subjective nature dyspnea and a poor understanding of pathophysiological mechanisms challenge the clinician in developing management plans. Nebulized furosemide has been identified as a novel approach to dyspnea management. This review summarizes published studies, both clinical and experimental, reporting the use of nebulized furosemide. The search criteria yielded 42 articles published in the period 1988 to 2004. Although nebulized furosemide appeared to have a positive influence on dyspnea and physiological measurements, caution must be taken with the results primarily coming from small-scale clinical trials or observation trials. Despite the limitations of the studies reported, given the range of conditions reporting effectiveness of nebulized furosemide, further investigation of this potential novel treatment of dyspnea is warranted.