Effect of intravenous carperitide versus nitrates as first-line vasodilators on in-hospital outcomes in hospitalized patients with acute heart failure: Insight from a nationwide claim-based database.

BACKGROUNDS: Carperitide is a recombinantly produced intravenous formulation of human atrial natriuretic peptide. Despite of negative impacts of nesiritide on clinical outcomes for acute heart failure (AHF), carperitide has been used for around a half of Japanese AHF patients as a vasodilator based on limited evidences. We sought to determine the effect of carperitide compared to nitrates in the early care for AHF patients treated with vasodilators. METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted a cohort study of patients admitted with AHF to 808 hospitals from April 2012 to March 2014. Patients were extracted from 1,422,703 hospitalizations according to ICD-10 heart failure codes. Patients who had sepsis or mechanical supports during hospitalization were excluded. Outcomes were in-hospital death, length of hospitalization and cost of hospitalization. Among 76,924 patients, 45,595 were in patients treated with either carperitide or nitrates during the first 2 days (carperitide; 33,386, nitrates; 12,209). After application of inverse probability of treatment weighting with variables including demographics, comorbidities and treatments, there was perfect balance in both groups. Patients who were treated with carperitide had substantially higher covariate adjusted in-hospital mortality (HR 1.49 95%CI 1.35-1.64), longer length of hospitalization (Coefficients 0.062 95%CI 0.048 to 0.076) and greater cost of hospitalization (Coefficients 0.024 95%CI 0.010 to 0.037) compared to those treated with nitrates. CONCLUSIONS: In Japanese AHF patients during their early inpatient care, carperitide use was significantly associated with worse outcomes when compared to nitrates use, suggesting the routine use of carperitide might not be recommended as a first-line vasodilator for AHF.

The impact of carperitide usage on the cost of hospitalization and outcome in patients with acute heart failure: High value care vs. low value care campaign in Japan.

BACKGROUND: The usefulness of carperitide in patients with acute heart failure (AHF) has not been confirmed; carperitide is expensive, and thus, its routine use has not been shown to add much value in clinical settings. We analyzed the impact of carperitide usage on the outcome and cost of hospitalization in AHF patients. METHODS: Data obtained from the Diagnosis Procedure Combination (DPC) database from July 2014 until June 2015 from 371 hospitals were analyzed. Emergent patients with acute heart failure (ICD code I50* and DPC code 050130) who did not undergo any surgical procedures were enrolled. We compared the outcomes and cost between the carperitide group and non-carperitide group using propensity score matched analysis. RESULTS: In 37,891 heart failure patients (52.2% male; 79.2±11.9years), 13,421 pairs were selected according to the propensity score matching. In-hospital death occurred more frequently in the carperitide group (n=997; 7.4%) than in the non-carperitide group (n=844; 6.3%; p<0.01). Carperitide use was also related with higher costs of hospitalizations, and total dose of carperitide administered during hospitalization decreased with the increasing case volume (p<0.01). On the other hand, carperitide usage was frequently recognized in hospitals with larger annual case volumes (32.1%, Q1; 37.3%, Q2; 40.7%, Q3, p-value<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Carperitide usage negatively affected patient outcomes and cost of hospitalization. In hospitals with lower annual case volume, clinicians should pay attention to the total dose and duration of carperitide. On the other hand, in hospitals with larger annual case volumes, clinicians should pay attention to the thresholds/indications to prescribe carperitide in AHF patients.

Effects of low-dose atrial natriuretic peptide infusion on cardiac surgery-associated acute kidney injury: A multicenter randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effects of atrial natriuretic peptide (ANP) on renal function and medical costs in patients with acute kidney injury (AKI) associated with cardiac surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Japanese trial for AKI in Post-cardiovascular surgery patients by ANP (JAPAN) was a prospective, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study conducted in 11 hospitals in Japan. Acute kidney injury was defined as an increase in serum creatinine of at least 0.3 mg/dL within 48 hours. The patients were randomly assigned to receive ANP (0.02 µg kg-1 min-1) or placebo. The primary end point was a change in renal function. The secondary end points were a need for renal replacement therapy, the lengths of intensive care unit and hospital stays, and medical costs incurred over the 90-day follow-up. RESULTS: Of the 77 randomized patients, 37 were in the ANP group and 40 were in the placebo group. Although ANP significantly (P = .018) increased urine output, it did not significantly improve renal function compared with placebo. There were no significant differences between the groups in the renal replacement therapy rate, the lengths of the intensive care unit and hospital stays, or medical costs. CONCLUSION: Atrial natriuretic peptide infusion did not show a renoprotective effect or cost-saving effect in the treatment of cardiac surgery-associated AKI.

Comparison of salt with low-dose furosemide and carperitide for treating acute decompensated heart failure: a single-center retrospective cohort study.

Hypertonic saline with furosemide has been proposed for a long time as an effective therapeutic option for the treatment of acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF). We previously reported the efficacy of continuous infusion of 1.7 % hypertonic saline plus low-dose furosemide in treatment for ADHF. Although this therapeutic strategy can be a useful option for effective decongestion in treatment for ADHF, there is no study that assesses the effect and safety of saline supplementation compared with standard therapy in Japan. The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness of 1.7 % hypertonic saline plus low-dose furosemide infusion compared with carperitide. We compared clinical outcomes, adverse events, and cost for patients receiving carperitide (carperitide group) with those for patients receiving 1.7 % hypertonic saline plus low-dose furosemide (salt group) during the initial hospitalization for ADHF. The cost analysis was performed on the basis of the previous report about cost-effectiveness of acute heart failure. A total of 175 ADHF patients received either carperitide (n = 111) or 1.7 % hypertonic saline plus low-dose furosemide infusion (n = 64) as initial treatment. There were no differences in length of hospital stay (27 ± 19 vs. 25 ± 16 day, p = 0.170) and infusion period (7.2 ± 6.1 vs. 8.4 ± 7.5 day, p = 0.474) between the two groups. The incidence of rehospitalization did not differ at 1 month (7.6 vs. 6.6 %, p = 1.000) and 1 year (36.8 vs. 37.7 %, p = 0.907) between the two groups. The Kaplan-Meier curves revealed no significant difference for 1 year all-cause mortality between the two groups (log-rank, p = 0.724). The single hospitalization cost was 95,314 yen lower and the yearly hospitalization cost 125,628 yen lower in the salt group compared with the carperitide group. Thus, intravenous 1.7 % hypertonic saline plus low-dose furosemide infusion is as effective as carperitide in terms of clinical outcome and is a cost-effective therapeutic strategy for the treatment of ADHF.