A pilot study comparing furosemide and hydrochlorothiazide in patients with hypertension and stage 4 or 5 chronic kidney disease.

Furosemide is the diuretic of choice for the treatment of hypertension in chronic kidney disease but the adaptative changes in the distal nephron may decrease its efficacy. Hydrochlorothiazide is not believed to be efficient in this setting. In a randomized, double-blind, cross-over trial, 23 patients with hypertension and stage 4 or 5 chronic kidney disease received long-acting furosemide (60 mg) and hydrochlorothiazide (25 mg) for 3 months and then both diuretics for 3 months. Sodium and chloride fractional excretions were measured after 3 months of each diuretic and then after their association. A trend towards an increase in the fractional excretion of sodium and chloride was observed with furosemide and hydrochlorothiazide (P=not significant). The association of the two diuretics increased the fractional excretions of sodium and chloride from 3.4±1.8 to 4.9±2.8 and from 3.8±2.0 to 6.0±3.1, respectively (P<.05). Furosemide and hydrochlorothiazide decreased mean blood pressure by the same extent. The association of the two diuretics was more efficient on blood pressure. There were no differences between furosemide and hydrochlorothiazide with respect to natriuresis and blood pressure control in patients with hypertension and chronic kidney disease.

A randomized trial of furosemide vs hydrochlorothiazide in patients with chronic renal failure and hypertension.

BACKGROUND: Loop diuretics are the drugs of choice for the treatment of hypertension in chronic renal failure patients. However, the adaptive changes in the distal nephron and the short half-life of these drugs may decrease their long-term efficacy. Thiazides are not believed to be efficient in advanced renal failure, but this is debated. METHODS: We compared the efficacy of long-acting furosemide (60 mg/day) and hydrochlorothiazide (25 mg/day) in a double-blind, randomized crossover trial in seven patients with severe renal failure and hypertension (seven men, 54+/-10 years old). The primary end-points were sodium and chloride fractional excretions after 1 month of each diuretic and then after their combination. During the trial, other treatments and the diet were controlled. RESULTS: A trend towards an increase in the fractional excretion of sodium and of chloride was observed with furosemide, but the difference did not reach the level of statistical significance (P = NS). Hydrochlorothiazide significantly increased fractional excretion of sodium and chloride from 3.7+/-0.9 to 5.5+/-0.3 and from 3.9+/-0.19 to 6.5+/-0.3, respectively (P<0.05). The combination of the two diuretics had no additional effect on the increase in sodium and chloride fractional excretion. Furosemide, hydrochlorothiazide and the combination of the two diuretics decreased mean arterial blood pressure by the same extent from 112 to 97, 99 and 97 mmHg, respectively (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Hydrochlorothiazide increased the fractional excretion of sodium and chloride more than furosemide did in hypertensive severe renal failure patients. Mean arterial blood pressure decreased by the same amount with both diuretics. Combining furosemide and hydrochlorothiazide did not increase the efficacy of hydrochlorothiazide.

Testosterone measured by 10 immunoassays and by isotope-dilution gas chromatography-mass spectrometry in sera from 116 men, women, and children.

BACKGROUND: Commercially available testosterone immunoassays give divergent results, especially at the low concentrations seen in women. We compared immunoassays and a nonimmunochemical method that could quantify low testosterone concentrations. METHODS: We measured serum testosterone in 50 men, 55 women, and 11 children with use of eight nonisotopic immunoassays, two isotopic immunoassays, and isotope-dilution gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (ID/GC-MS). RESULTS: Compared with ID/GC-MS, 7 of the 10 immunoassays tested overestimated testosterone concentrations in samples from women; mean immunoassay results were 46% above those obtained by ID/GC-MS. The immunoassays underestimated testosterone concentrations in samples from men, giving mean results 12% below those obtained by ID/GC-MS. In women, at concentrations of 0.6-7.2 nmol/L, 3 of the 10 immunoassays gave positive mean differences >2.0 nmol/L (range, -0.7 to 3.3 nmol/L) compared with ID/GC-MS; in men at concentrations of 8.2-58 nmol/L, 3 of the 10 immunoassays tested gave mean differences >4.0 nmol/L (range, -4.8 to 2.6 nmol/L). CONCLUSION: None of the immunoassays tested was sufficiently reliable for the investigation of sera from children and women, in whom very low (0.17 nmol/L) and low (<1.7 nmol/L) testosterone concentrations are expected.