Continuous infusion versus bolus injection of loop diuretics for acute heart failure.

BACKGROUND: Acute heart failure (AHF) is new onset of, or a sudden worsening of, chronic heart failure characterised by congestion in about 95% of cases or end-organ hypoperfusion in 5% of cases. Treatment often requires urgent escalation of diuretic therapy, mainly through hospitalisation. This Cochrane review evaluated the efficacy of intravenous loop diuretics strategies in treating AHF in individuals with New York Heart Association (NYHA) classification III or IV and fluid overload. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of intravenous continuous infusion versus bolus injection of loop diuretics for the initial treatment of acute heart failure in adults. SEARCH METHODS: We identified trials through systematic searches of bibliographic databases and in clinical trials registers including CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CPCI-S on the Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry platform (ICTRP), and the European Union Trials register. We conducted reference checking and citation searching, and contacted study authors to identify additional studies. The latest search was performed on 29 February 2024. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving adults with AHF, NYHA classification III or IV, regardless of aetiology or ejection fraction, where trials compared intravenous continuous infusion of loop diuretics with intermittent bolus injection in AHF. We excluded trials with chronic stable heart failure, cardiogenic shock, renal artery stenosis, or end-stage renal disease. Additionally, we excluded studies combining loop diuretics with hypertonic saline, inotropes, vasoactive medications, or renal replacement therapy and trials where diuretic dosing was protocol-driven to achieve a target urine output, due to confounding factors. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened papers for inclusion and reviewed full-texts. Outcomes included weight loss, all-cause mortality, length of hospital stay, readmission following discharge, and occurrence of acute kidney injury. We performed risk of bias assessment and meta-analysis where data permitted and assessed certainty of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS: The review included seven RCTs, spanning 32 hospitals in seven countries in North America, Europe, and Asia. Data collection ranged from eight months to six years. Following exclusion of participants in subgroups with confounding treatments and different clinical settings, 681 participants were eligible for review. These additional study characteristics, coupled with our strict inclusion and exclusion criteria, improve the applicability of the body of the evidence as they reflect real-world clinical practice. Meta-analysis was feasible for net weight loss, all-cause mortality, length of hospital stay, readmission, and acute kidney injury. Literature review and narrative analysis explored daily fluid balance; cardiovascular mortality; B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) change; N-terminal-proBNP change; and adverse incidents such as ototoxicity, hypotension, and electrolyte imbalances. Risk of bias assessment revealed two studies with low overall risk, four with some concerns, and one with high risk. All sensitivity analyses excluded trials at high risk of bias. Only narrative analysis was conducted for 'daily fluid balance' due to diverse data presentation methods across two studies (169 participants, the evidence was very uncertain about the effect). Results of narrative analysis varied. For instance, one study reported higher daily fluid balance within the first 24 hours in the continuous infusion group compared to the bolus injection group, whereas there was no difference in fluid balance beyond this time point. Continuous intravenous infusion of loop diuretics may result in mean net weight loss of 0.86 kg more than bolus injection of loop diuretics, but the evidence is very uncertain (mean difference (MD) 0.86 kg, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.44 to 1.28; 5 trials, 497 participants; P < 0.001, I2 = 21%; very low-certainty evidence). Importantly, sensitivity analysis excluding trials with high risk of bias showed there was insufficient evidence for a difference in bodyweight loss between groups (MD 0.70 kg, 95% CI -0.06 to 1.46; 3 trials, 378 participants; P = 0.07, I2 = 0%). There may be little to no difference in all-cause mortality between continuous infusion and bolus injection (risk ratio (RR) 1.53, 95% CI 0.81 to 2.90; 5 trials, 530 participants; P = 0.19, I2 = 4%; low-certainty evidence). Despite sensitivity analysis, the direction of the evidence remained unchanged. No trials measured cardiovascular mortality. There may be little to no difference in the length of hospital stay between continuous infusion and bolus injection of loop diuretics, but the evidence is very uncertain (MD -1.10 days, 95% CI -4.84 to 2.64; 4 trials, 211 participants; P = 0.57, I2 = 88%; very low-certainty evidence). Sensitivity analysis improved heterogeneity; however, the direction of the evidence remained unchanged. There may be little to no difference in the readmission to hospital between continuous infusion and bolus injection of loop diuretics (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.16; 3 trials, 400 participants; P = 0.31, I2 = 0%; low-certainty evidence). Sensitivity analysis continued to show insufficient evidence for a difference in the readmission to hospital between groups. There may be little to no difference in the occurrence of acute kidney injury as an adverse event between continuous infusion and bolus injection of intravenous loop diuretics (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.49; 3 trials, 491 participants; P = 0.92, I2 = 0%; low-certainty evidence). Sensitivity analysis continued to show that continuous infusion may make little to no difference on the occurrence of acute kidney injury as an adverse events compared to the bolus injection of intravenous loop diuretics. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Analysis of available data comparing two delivery methods of diuretics in acute heart failure found that the current data are insufficient to show superiority of one strategy intervention over the other. Our findings were based on trials meeting stringent inclusion and exclusion criteria to ensure validity. Despite previous reviews suggesting advantages of continuous infusion over bolus injections, our review found insufficient evidence to support or refute this. However, our review, which excluded trials with clinical confounders and RCTs with high risk of bias, offers the most robust conclusion to date.

Endogenous GLP-1 levels play an important role in determining the efficacy of DPP-IV Inhibitors in both prediabetes and type 2 diabetes.

Background: In contrast to Western population, glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) levels are preserved in some East Asian population with type 2 diabetes (T2D), explaining why dipeptidyl peptidase-IV (DPP-IV) inhibitors are more effective in East Asians. We assessed whether differences in endogenous GLP-1 levels resulted in different treatment responses to DPP-IV inhibitors in prediabetes and T2D. Methods: A prospective 12-week study using linagliptin 5mg once daily in 50 subjects (28 prediabetes and 22 T2D) who were stratified into high versus low fasting GLP-1 groups. A 75-g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) was performed at week 0 and 12. Primary outcomes were changes in HbA1c, fasting and post-OGTT glucose after 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes included changes in insulin resistance and beta cell function indices. Results: There was a greater HbA1c reduction in subjects with high GLP-1 compared to low GLP-1 levels in both the prediabetes and T2D populations [least-squares mean (LS-mean) change of -0.33% vs. -0.11% and -1.48% vs. -0.90% respectively)]. Linagliptin significantly reduced glucose excursion by 18% in high GLP-1 compared with 8% in low GLP-1 prediabetes groups. The reduction in glucose excursion was greater in high GLP-1 compared to low GLP-1 T2D by 30% and 21% respectively. There were significant LS-mean between-group differences in fasting glucose (-0.95 mmol/L), 2-hour glucose post-OGTT (-2.4 mmol/L) in the high GLP-1 T2D group. Improvement in insulin resistance indices were seen in the high GLP-1 T2D group while high GLP-1 prediabetes group demonstrated improvement in beta cell function indices. No incidence of hypoglycemia was reported. Conclusions: Linagliptin resulted in a greater HbA1c reduction in the high GLP-1 prediabetes and T2D compared to low GLP-1 groups. Endogenous GLP-1 level play an important role in determining the efficacy of DPP-IV inhibitors irrespective of the abnormal glucose tolerance states.

Fasting and stimulated glucagon-like peptide-1 exhibit a compensatory adaptive response in diabetes and pre-diabetes states: A multi-ethnic comparative study.

Background: Impaired secretion of glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) among Caucasians contributes to reduced incretin effect in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients. However, studies emanating from East Asia suggested preserved GLP-1 levels in pre-diabetes (pre-DM) and T2DM. We aimed to resolve these conflicting findings by investigating GLP-1 levels during oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) among Malay, Chinese, and Indian ethnicities with normal glucose tolerance (NGT), pre-DM, and T2DM. The association between total GLP-1 levels, insulin resistance, and insulin sensitivity, and GLP-1 predictors were also analyzed. Methods: A total of 174 subjects were divided into NGT (n=58), pre-DM (n=54), and T2DM (n=62). Plasma total GLP-1 concentrations were measured at 0, 30, and 120 min during a 75-g OGTT. Homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR), HOMA of insulin sensitivity (HOMA-IS), and triglyceride-glucose index (TyG) were calculated. Results: Total GLP-1 levels at fasting and 30 min were significantly higher in T2DM compared with pre-DM and NGT (27.18 ± 11.56 pmol/L vs. 21.99 ± 10.16 pmol/L vs. 16.24 ± 7.79 pmol/L, p=0.001; and 50.22 ± 18.03 pmol/L vs. 41.05 ± 17.68 pmol/L vs. 31.44 ± 22.59 pmol/L, p<0.001; respectively). Ethnicity was a significant determinant of AUCGLP-1, with the Indians exhibiting higher GLP-1 responses than Chinese and Malays. Indians were the most insulin resistant, whereas Chinese were the most insulin sensitive. The GLP-1 levels were positively correlated with HOMA-IR and TyG but negatively correlated with HOMA-IS. This relationship was evident among Indians who exhibited augmented GLP-1 responses proportionately to their high insulin-resistant states. Conclusion: This is the first study that showed GLP-1 responses are augmented as IR states increase. Fasting and post-OGTT GLP-1 levels are raised in T2DM and pre-DM compared to that in NGT. This raises a possibility of an adaptive compensatory response that has not been reported before. Among the three ethnic groups, the Indians has the highest IR and GLP-1 levels supporting the notion of an adaptive compensatory secretion of GLP-1.