Efficacy and Safety of Dapagliflozin in Patients With Acute Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: The primary goals during acute heart failure (AHF) hospitalization are decongestion and guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) optimization. Unlike diuretics or other GDMT, early dapagliflozin initiation could achieve both AHF goals. OBJECTIVES: The authors aimed to assess the diuretic efficacy and safety of early dapagliflozin initiation in AHF. METHODS: In a multicenter, open-label study, 240 patients were randomized within 24 hours of hospital presentation for hypervolemic AHF to dapagliflozin 10 mg once daily or structured usual care with protocolized diuretic titration until day 5 or hospital discharge. The primary outcome, diuretic efficiency expressed as cumulative weight change per cumulative loop diuretic dose, was compared across treatment assignment using a proportional odds model adjusted for baseline weight. Secondary and safety outcomes were adjudicated by a blinded committee. RESULTS: For diuretic efficiency, there was no difference between dapagliflozin and usual care (OR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.41-1.02; P = 0.06). Dapagliflozin was associated with reduced loop diuretic doses (560 mg [Q1-Q3: 260-1,150 mg] vs 800 mg [Q1-Q3: 380-1,715 mg]; P = 0.006) and fewer intravenous diuretic up-titrations (P ≤ 0.05) to achieve equivalent weight loss as usual care. Early dapagliflozin initiation did not increase diabetic, renal, or cardiovascular safety events. Dapagliflozin was associated with improved median 24-hour natriuresis (P = 0.03) and urine output (P = 0.005), expediting hospital discharge over the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Early dapagliflozin during AHF hospitalization is safe and fulfills a component of GDMT optimization. Dapagliflozin was not associated with a statistically significant reduction in weight-based diuretic efficiency but was associated with evidence for enhanced diuresis among patients with AHF. (Efficacy and Safety of Dapagliflozin in Acute Heart Failure [DICTATE-AHF]; NCT04298229).

Identification of Risk Factors for Gliptin-associated Bullous Pemphigoid among Diabetic Patients.

Drug-associated bullous pemphigoid has been shown to follow long-term gliptin (dipeptidyl-peptidase 4 inhibitors) intake. This study aimed at identifying risk factors for gliptin-associated bullous pemphigoid among patients with type 2 diabetes. A retrospective study was conducted in a tertiary centre among diabetic patients exposed to gliptins between the years 2008-2021. Data including demographics, comorbidities, medications, and laboratory results were collected using the MDClone platform. Seventy-six patients with type 2 diabetes treated with dipeptidyl-peptidase 4 inhibitors who subsequently developed bullous pemphigoid were compared with a cohort of 8,060 diabetic patients exposed to dipeptidyl-peptidase 4 inhibitors who did not develop bullous pemphigoid. Based on a multivariable analysis adjusted for age and other covariates, Alzheimer's disease and other dementias were significantly more prevalent in patients with bullous pemphigoid (p = 0.0013). Concomitant use of either thiazide or loop diuretics and gliptin therapy was associated with drug-associated bullous pemphigoid (p < 0.0001 for both). While compared with sitagliptin, exposure to linagliptin and vildagliptin were associated with bullous pemphigoid with an odds ratio of 5.68 and 6.61 (p < 0.0001 for both), respectively. These results suggest gliptins should be prescribed with caution to patients with type 2 diabetes with coexisting Alzheimer's and other dementias, or patients receiving long-term use of thiazides and loop diuretics. The use of sitagliptin over linagliptin and vildagliptin should be preferred in these patients.

Enhanced Decongestive Therapy in Patients With Acute Heart Failure: JACC Review Topic of the Week.

Because signs of congestion are associated with adverse outcomes in patients with acute heart failure (AHF), attempts were made to decongest patients as much as possible with diuretic agents (loop diuretic agents, thiazides, acetazolamide) or mechanical devices. Those interventions improved signs of congestion but failed to meaningfully improve patients' symptoms, improve quality of life, or reduce early readmissions or deaths. Recent studies have shown that implementation of guideline-directed medical therapies after an AHF admission led to both more decongestion and improved symptoms, quality of life, and outcomes. Therefore, for most patients with AHF whose symptoms and congestion can be controlled with loop diuretic agents, the main focus should be rapid guideline-directed medical therapy uptitration. Enhanced decongestion, ie, adding a second-line diuretic agent to a loop diuretic agent, should be reserved for those patients who do not respond to loop diuretic agents.

Decongestion (instead of ultrafiltration?).

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To summarize the contemporary evidence on decongestion strategies in patients with acute heart failure (AHF). RECENT FINDINGS: While loop diuretic therapy has remained the backbone of decongestive treatment in AHF, multiple randomized clinical trials suggest that early combination with other diuretic classes or molecules with diuretic properties should be considered. Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists and sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors are disease-modifying drugs in heart failure that favourably influence prognosis early on, advocating their start as soon as possible in the absence of any compelling contraindications. Short-term upfront use of acetazolamide in adjunction to intravenous loop diuretic therapy relieves congestion faster, avoids diuretic resistance, and may shorten hospitalization length. Thiazide-like diuretics remain a good option to break diuretic resistance. Currently, ultrafiltration in AHF remains mainly reserved for patient with an inadequate response to pharmacological treatment. SUMMARY: In most patients with AHF, decongestion can be achieved effectively and safely through combination diuretic therapies. Appropriate diuretic therapy may shorten hospitalization length and improve quality of life, but has not yet proven to reduce death or heart failure readmissions. Ultrafiltration currently has a limited role in AHF, mainly as bail-out strategy, but evidence for a more upfront use remains inconclusive.

Rationale and protocol of the LAQUA-HF trial: a factorial randomised controlled trial evaluating the effects of neurohormonal and diuretic agents on health-status reported outcomes in heart failure patients.

INTRODUCTION: The current guidelines strongly recommend early initiation of multiple classes of cardioprotective drugs for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction to improve prognosis and health status. However, evidence on the optimal sequencing of approved drugs is scarce, highlighting the importance of individualised treatment plans. Registry data indicate that only a portion of these patients can tolerate all four recommended classes, underscoring the need to establish the favoured sequence when using these drugs. Additionally, the choice between long-acting and short-acting loop diuretics in the present era remains uncertain. This is particularly relevant given the frequent use of angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor, both of which potentiate natriuretic effects. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: In a prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded endpoint method, LAQUA-HF (Long-acting vs short-acting diuretics and neurohormonal Agents on patients' QUAlity-of-life in Heart Failure patients) will be a 2×2 factorial design, with a total of 240 patients randomised to sacubitril/valsartan versus dapagliflozin and torsemide versus furosemide in a 1:1 ratio. Most enrolment sites have participated in an ongoing observational registry for consecutive patients hospitalised for heart failure involved dedicated study coordinators, and used the same framework to enrol patients. The primary endpoint is the change in patients' health status over 6 months, defined by the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire. Additionally, clinical benefit at 6 months defined as a hierarchical composite endpoint will be assessed by the win ratio as the secondary endpoint. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The medical ethics committee Keio University in Japan has approved this trial. All participants provide written informed consent prior to study entry. The results of this trial will be disseminated in one main paper and additional papers on secondary endpoints and subgroup analyses. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: UMIN000045229.

Diuretic Treatment in Patients with Heart Failure: Current Evidence and Future Directions-Part II: Combination Therapy.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Fluid retention or congestion is a major cause of symptoms, poor quality of life, and adverse outcome in patients with heart failure (HF). Despite advances in disease-modifying therapy, the mainstay of treatment for congestion-loop diuretics-has remained largely unchanged for 50 years. In these two articles (part I: loop diuretics and part II: combination therapy), we will review the history of diuretic treatment and current trial evidence for different diuretic strategies and explore potential future directions of research. RECENT FINDINGS: We will assess recent trials, including DOSE, TRANSFORM, ADVOR, CLOROTIC, OSPREY-AHF, and PUSH-AHF, and assess how these may influence current practice and future research. There are few data on which to base diuretic therapy in clinical practice. The most robust evidence is for high-dose loop diuretic treatment over low-dose treatment for patients admitted to hospital with HF, yet this is not reflected in guidelines. There is an urgent need for more and better research on different diuretic strategies in patients with HF.

Evaluating Provider and Pharmacy Discordance in Potential Calcium Channel Blocker-Loop Diuretic Prescribing Cascade.

BACKGROUND: Prescribing cascades occur when a drug-induced adverse event is treated with a new medication. Identifying clinical scenarios in which prescribing cascades are more likely to occur may help determine ways to prevent prescribing cascades. OBJECTIVE: To understand the extent to which discordant providers and discordant pharmacies contribute to the dihydropyridine calcium channel blocker (DH CCB)-loop diuretic prescribing cascade. STUDY POPULATION AND DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study using Medicare Fee-For-Service data (2011-2018) of adults aged ≥ 66 years. EXPOSURES: Patients who initiated DH CCB with subsequent initiation of loop diuretic (DH CCB-loop diuretic dyad) within 90 days or patients who initiated angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI)/angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) with subsequent initiation of a loop diuretic (ACEI/ARB-loop diuretic dyad; control). MAIN OUTCOMES: The primary outcomes were provider and pharmacy discordance for prescribing cascades and control drug pairs. Baseline clinical and socio-demographic characteristics were balanced using inverse probability of treatment weighting with propensity scores. RESULTS:  Overall, we identified 1987 DH CCB-loop diuretic dyads and 3148 ACEI/ARB-loop diuretic dyads. Discordant providers occurred in 64% of DH CCB-loop diuretic dyads and 55% of ACEI/ARB-loop diuretic dyads, while discordant pharmacies occurred in 19% of DH CCB-loop diuretic dyads and 16% of ACEI/ARB-loop diuretic dyads. After adjustment, the risk of having discordant providers was 20% {Relative Risk (RR) 1.20 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.14-1.26]} higher in the DH CCB-loop diuretic dyad compared with the ACEI/ARB-loop diuretic dyad. Moreover, pharmacy discordance was 17% (RR 1.17 [95% CI 1.02-1.33]) higher. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that discordant providers and discordant pharmacies were more commonly involved in the potential prescribing cascade when compared with a similar control dyad of medications. Opportunities for enhanced care coordination and medication reconciliation should be explored to prevent unnecessary polypharmacy.

Diuretic Treatment in Patients with Heart Failure: Current Evidence and Future Directions - Part I: Loop Diuretics.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Fluid retention or congestion is a major cause of symptoms, poor quality of life, and adverse outcome in patients with heart failure (HF). Despite advances in disease-modifying therapy, the mainstay of treatment for congestion-loop diuretics-has remained largely unchanged for 50 years. In these two articles (part I: loop diuretics and part II: combination therapy), we will review the history of diuretic treatment and the current trial evidence for different diuretic strategies and explore potential future directions of research. RECENT FINDINGS: We will assess recent trials including DOSE, TRANSFORM, ADVOR, CLOROTIC, OSPREY-AHF, and PUSH-AHF amongst others, and assess how these may influence current practice and future research. There are few data on which to base diuretic therapy in clinical practice. The most robust evidence is for high dose loop diuretic treatment over low-dose treatment for patients admitted to hospital with HF, yet this is not reflected in guidelines. There is an urgent need for more and better research on different diuretic strategies in patients with HF.

Torsemide vs Furosemide Among Patients With New-Onset vs Worsening Chronic Heart Failure: A Substudy of the TRANSFORM-HF Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Differences in clinical profiles, outcomes, and diuretic treatment effects may exist between patients with de novo heart failure (HF) and worsening chronic HF (WHF). Objectives: To compare clinical characteristics and treatment outcomes of torsemide vs furosemide in patients hospitalized with de novo HF vs WHF. Design, Setting, and Participants: All patients with a documented ejection fraction who were randomized in the Torsemide Comparison With Furosemide for Management of Heart Failure (TRANSFORM-HF) trial, conducted from June 18 through March 2022, were included in this post hoc analysis. Study data were analyzed March to May 2023. Exposure: Patients were categorized by HF type and further divided by loop diuretic strategy. Main Outcomes and Measures: End points included all-cause mortality and hospitalization outcomes over 12 months, as well as change from baseline in the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Clinical Summary Score (KCCQ-CSS). Results: Among 2858 patients (mean [SD] age, 64.5 [14.0] years; 1803 male [63.1%]), 838 patients (29.3%) had de novo HF, and 2020 patients (70.7%) had WHF. Patients with de novo HF were younger (mean [SD] age, 60.6 [14.5] years vs 66.1 [13.5] years), had a higher glomerular filtration rate (mean [SD], 68.6 [24.9] vs 57.0 [24.0]), lower levels of natriuretic peptides (median [IQR], brain-type natriuretic peptide, 855.0 [423.0-1555.0] pg/mL vs 1022.0 [500.0-1927.0] pg/mL), and tended to be discharged on lower doses of loop diuretic (mean [SD], 50.3 [46.2] mg vs 63.8 [52.4] mg). De novo HF was associated with lower all-cause mortality at 12 months (de novo, 65 of 838 [9.1%] vs WHF, 408 of 2020 [25.4%]; adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.50; 95% CI, 0.38-0.66; P < .001). Similarly, lower all-cause first rehospitalization at 12 months and greater improvement from baseline in KCCQ-CSS at 12 months were noted among patients with de novo HF (median [IQR]: de novo, 29.94 [27.35-32.54] vs WHF, 23.68 [21.62-25.74]; adjusted estimated difference in means: 6.26; 95% CI, 3.72-8.81; P < .001). There was no significant difference in mortality with torsemide vs furosemide in either de novo (No. of events [rate per 100 patient-years]: torsemide, 27 [7.4%] vs furosemide, 38 [10.9%]; aHR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.40-1.14; P = .15) or WHF (torsemide 212 [26.8%] vs furosemide, 196 [24.0%]; aHR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.89-1.32; P = .42; P for interaction = .10), In addition, no significant differences in hospitalizations, first all-cause hospitalization, or total hospitalizations at 12 months were noted with a strategy of torsemide vs furosemide in either de novo HF or WHF. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients discharged after hospitalization for HF, de novo HF was associated with better clinical and patient-reported outcomes when compared with WHF. Regardless of HF type, there was no significant difference between torsemide and furosemide with respect to 12-month clinical or patient-reported outcomes.

Predictors of a Good Diuretic Response and Administration Methods for Carperitide in Patients With Acute Heart Failure.

PURPOSE: In Japan, carperitide has been recommended for the treatment of pulmonary congestion in patients with acute heart failure. Identifying useful indicators to support the decision to administer carperitide and the optimal timing of administration may lead to better improvement of pulmonary congestion. Therefore, we investigated the factors associated with good diuretic response to carperitide in patients with acute heart failure and the optimal timing of carperitide administration. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study investigated 293 hospitalized patients who were diagnosed with acute heart failure and treated with carperitide at the Department of Cardiology, Showa University Fujigaoka Hospital. The primary endpoint was the diuretic response to carperitide. Patients with urine output ≥100 mL/h were defined as the good diuretic response group, and those with a urine output <100 mL/h during the first 6 hours of carperitide administration were defined as the poor diuretic response group. Multivariate analysis was used to examine the predictors of good diuretic response. The relationship between the time from intravenous furosemide to carperitide administration and urine output was also investigated. FINDINGS: The patients' median age was 77 (range: 28-99) years, and 75.5% had New York Heart Association stage IV acute heart failure. The median urine output within 6 hours of carperitide administration was 104.5 (range: 6.6-1571.3) mL/h, and 118 patients (53.6%) showed a good diuretic response. Significant predictors of good diuretic response were age < 75 years [odds ratio (OR) 4.186; 95% confidence interval (CI), 2.129-8.230; P < 0.001], no prior use of loop diuretics (OR 2.155; 95% CI, 1.104-4.207; P = 0.024), blood urea nitrogen <20 mg/dL (OR 2.637; 95% CI, 1.340-5.190; P = 0.005), and white blood cell count <8.6 × 109/L (OR 3.162; 95% CI, 1.628-6.140; P = 0.001). The median urine output in the group with <2 hours between intravenous furosemide and carperitide administration was significantly higher than that in the group with an interval >6 hours [127.3; interquartile range (IQR), 77.6-216.2 mL/h vs. 66.2; IQR. 51.8-114.8 mL/h; P = 0.012). IMPLICATIONS: The 4 predictors (age, no prior use of loop diuretics, blood urea nitrogen, and white blood cell count) of good diuretic response are useful indicators to support decision-making for carperitide administration. Additionally, the administration of carperitide within 2 hours of intravenous furosemide may lead to the improvement of pulmonary congestion.

Lung ultrasound and diuretic therapy in chronic heart failure: a randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Lung congestion is frequent in heart failure (HF) and is associated with symptoms and poor prognosis. Lung ultrasound (LUS) identification of B-lines may help refining congestion assessment on top of usual care. Three small trials comparing LUS-guided therapy to usual care in HF suggested that LUS-guided therapy could reduce urgent HF visits. However, to our knowledge, the usefulness of LUS in influencing loop diuretic dose adjustment in ambulatory chronic HF has not been studied. AIMS: To study whether to show or not LUS results to the HF assistant physician would change loop diuretic adjustments in "stable" chronic ambulatory HF patients. METHODS: Prospective randomised single-blinded trial comparing two strategies: (1) open 8-zone LUS with B-line results available to clinicians, or (2) blind LUS. The primary outcome was change in loop diuretic dose (up- or down-titration). RESULTS: A total of 139 patients entered the trial, 70 were randomised to blind LUS and 69 to open LUS. The median (percentile25-75) age was 72 (63-82) years, 82 (62%) were men, and the median LVEF was 39 (31-51) %. Randomisation groups were well balanced. Furosemide dose changes (up- and down-titration) were more frequent among patients in whom LUS results were open to the assistant physician: 13 (18.6%) in blind LUS vs. 22 (31.9%) in open LUS, OR 2.55, 95%CI 1.07-6.06. Furosemide dose changes (up- and down-titration) were more frequent and correlated significantly with the number of B-lines when LUS results were open (Rho = 0.30, P = 0.014), but not when LUS results were blinded (Rho = 0.19, P = 0.13). Compared to blind LUS, when LUS results were open, clinicians were more likely to up-titrate furosemide dose if the result "presence of pulmonary congestion" was identified and more likely to decrease furosemide dose in the case of an "absence of pulmonary congestion" result. The risk of HF events or cardiovascular death did not differ by randomisation group: 8 (11.4%) in blind LUS vs. 8 (11.6%) in open LUS. CONCLUSIONS: Showing the results of LUS B-lines to assistant physicians allowed more frequent loop diuretic changes (both up- and down-titration), which suggests that LUS may be used to tailor diuretic therapy to each patient congestion status.

Comparative Effect of Loop Diuretic Prescription on Mortality and Heart Failure Readmission.

Loop diuretics are a standard pharmacologic therapy in heart failure (HF) management. Although furosemide is most frequently used, torsemide and bumetanide are increasingly prescribed in clinical practice, possibly because of superior bioavailability. Few real-world comparative effectiveness studies have examined outcomes across all 3 loop diuretics. The study goal was to compare the effects of loop diuretic prescribing at HF hospitalization discharge on mortality and HF readmission. We identified patients in Medicare claims data initiating furosemide, torsemide, or bumetanide after an index HF hospitalization from 2007 to 2017. We estimated 6-month risks of all-cause mortality and a composite outcome (HF readmission or all-cause mortality) using inverse probability of treatment weighting to adjust for relevant confounders. We identified 62,632 furosemide, 1,720 torsemide, and 2,389 bumetanide initiators. The 6-month adjusted all-cause mortality risk was lowest for torsemide (13.2%), followed by furosemide (14.5%) and bumetanide (15.6%). The 6-month composite outcome risk was 21.4% for torsemide, 24.7% for furosemide, and 24.9% for bumetanide. Compared with furosemide, the 6-month all-cause mortality risk was 1.3% (95% confidence interval [CI]: -3.7, 1.0) lower for torsemide and 1.0% (95% CI: -1.2, 3.2) higher for bumetanide, and the 6-month composite outcome risk was 3.3% (95% CI: -6.3, -0.3) lower for torsemide and 0.2% (95% CI: -2.5, 2.9) higher for bumetanide. In conclusion, the findings suggested that the first prescribed loop diuretic following HF hospitalization is associated with clinically important differences in morbidity in older patients receiving torsemide, bumetanide, or furosemide. These differences were consistent for the effect of all-cause mortality alone, but were not statistically significant.

Adherence to Pharmacotherapies After Heart Transplantation in Relation to Multimorbidity and Socioeconomic Position: A Nationwide Register-Based Study.

No studies have examined the impact of multimorbidity and socioeconomic position (SEP) on adherence to the pharmacological therapies following heart transplantation (HTx). Using nationwide Danish registers, we tested the hypothesis that multimorbidity and SEP affect treatment patterns and adherence to pharmacological therapies in first-time HTx recipients. Pharmacological management included cost-free immunosuppressants and adjuvant medical treatment (preventive and hypertensive pharmacotherapies; loop diuretics). We enrolled 512 recipients. The median (IQR) age was 51 years (38-58 years) and 393 recipients (77%) were males. In recipients with at least two chronic diseases, prevalence of treatment with antihypertensive pharmacotherapies and loop diuretics was higher. The overall prevalence of adherence to treatment with tacrolimus or mycophenolate mofetil was at least 80%. Prevalence of adherence to preventive pharmacotherapies ranged between 65% and 95% and between 66% and 88% for antihypertensive pharmacotherapies and loop diuretics, respectively. In socioeconomically disadvantaged recipients, both the number of recipients treated with and adherence to cost-free everolimus, lipid modifying agents, angiotensin-converting enzyme/angiotensin II inhibitors, calcium channel blockers, and loop diuretics were lower. In recipients with multimorbidity, prevalence of treatment with antihypertensive pharmacotherapies and loop diuretics was higher. Among socioeconomically disadvantaged recipients, both number of patients treated with and adherence to cost-free everolimus and adjuvant pharmacotherapies were lower.

Astrocytic NKCC1 inhibits seizures by buffering Cl- and antagonizing neuronal NKCC1 at GABAergic synapses.

OBJECTIVE: A pathological excitatory action of the major inhibitory neurotransmitter γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA) has been observed in epilepsy. Blocking the Cl- importer NKCC1 with bumetanide is expected to reduce the neuronal intracellular Cl- concentration ([Cl- ]i ) and thereby attenuate the excitatory GABA response. Accordingly, several clinical trials of bumetanide for epilepsy were conducted. Although NKCC1 is expressed in both neurons and glial cells, an involvement of glial NKCC1 in seizures has not yet been reported. Astrocytes maintain high [Cl- ]i with NKCC1, and this gradient promotes Cl- efflux via the astrocytic GABAA receptor (GABAA R). This Cl- efflux buffers the synaptic cleft Cl- concentration to maintain the postsynaptic Cl- gradient during intense firing of GABAergic neurons, thereby sustaining its inhibitory action during seizure. In this study, we investigated the function of astrocytic NKCC1 in modulating the postsynaptic action of GABA in acute seizure models. METHODS: We used the astrocyte-specific conditional NKCC1 knockout (AstroNKCC1KO) mice. The seizurelike events (SLEs) in CA1 pyramidal neurons were triggered by tetanic stimulation of stratum radiatum in acute hippocampus slices. The SLE underlying GABAA R-mediated depolarization was evaluated by applying the GABAA R antagonist bicuculline. The pilocarpine-induced seizure in vivo was monitored in adult mice by the Racine scale. The SLE duration and tetanus stimulation intensity threshold and seizure behavior in AstroNKCC1KO mice and wild-type (WT) mice were compared. RESULTS: The AstroNKCC1KO mice were prone to seizures with lower threshold and longer duration of SLEs and larger GABAA R-mediated depolarization underlying the SLEs, accompanied by higher Racine-scored seizures. Bumetanide reduced these indicators of seizure in AstroNKCC1KO mice (which still express neuronal NKCC1), but not in the WT, both in vitro and in vivo. SIGNIFICANCE: Astrocytic NKCC1 inhibits GABA-mediated excitatory action during seizures, whereas neuronal NKCC1 has the converse effect, suggesting opposing actions of bumetanide on these cells.

Effect of Furosemide Versus Torsemide on Hospitalizations and Mortality in Patients With Heart Failure: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Loop diuretics are essential in the treatment of patients with heart failure (HF) who develop congestion. Furosemide is the most commonly used diuretic; however, some randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have shown varying results associated with torsemide and furosemide in terms of hospitalizations and mortality. We performed an updated meta-analysis of currently available RCTs comparing furosemide and torsemide to see if there is any difference in clinical outcomes in patients treated with these loop diuretics. PubMed, MEDLINE, Cochrane, and Embase databases were searched for RCTs comparing the outcomes in patients with HF treated with furosemide versus torsemide. The primary end points included all-cause mortality, all-cause hospitalizations, cardiovascular-related hospitalizations, and HF-related hospitalizations. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed to estimate the risk ratio (RR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI). A total of 10 RCTs with 4,127 patients (2,088 in the furosemide group and 2,039 in the torsemide group) were included in this analysis. A total of 56% of the patients were men and the mean age was 68 years. No significant difference was noted in all-cause mortality between the furosemide and torsemide groups (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.15, p = 0.70); however, patients treated with furosemide compared with torsemide had higher risks of cardiovascular hospitalizations (RR 1.36, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.65, p = 0.001), HF-related hospitalizations (RR 1.65, 95% CI 1.21 to 2.24, p = 0.001), and all-cause hospitalizations (RR 1.06, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.11, p = 0.02). In conclusion, patients with HF treated with torsemide have a reduced risk of hospitalizations compared with those treated with furosemide, without any difference in mortality. These data indicate that torsemide may be a better choice to treat patients with HF.

Serial evaluation of loop diuretic efficiency following left ventricular assist device implantation.

More than 50% of heart failure (HF) patients require diuretic therapy after left ventricular assist device (LVAD). Although few data related to diuretic response (DR) exist in stage D patients, tubular sodium reabsorption may be clinically prognostic independent of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and proteinuria within this cohort. We aimed to characterize DR serially before and after LVAD implantation in a stage D population. We conducted a prospective, observational cohort study of HF patients receiving diuretics with plans to undergo LVAD implantation. We measured urine sodium (UNa) and creatinine (UCr) at three points after diuretic therapy: pre-LVAD, post-LVAD prior to discharge, and as an outpatient. Prior to LVAD, patients (N = 19) had an average eGFR of 54.0 ± 18.0 mL/min/1.73 m2, spot UNa of 74.8 ± 28.0 mmol/L, and fractional excretion of sodium (FENa) of 3.1 ± 2.7%. Pre-LVAD, eGFR did not correlate with spot UNa nor FENa (p > 0.05 for both). LVAD implantation did not improve DR post-LVAD (mean change FENa per 40 mg IV furosemide 0.5 ± 1.0%; p = 0.84), and 90% of patients required loop diuretics at 90 days post-surgery. Improved hemodynamics following LVAD may not improve DR or tubular function; larger studies are needed to confirm our results and assess the utility of DR to predict post-LVAD outcomes.