BACKGROUND: Diuretic resistance is a common issue in patients with acute decompensation of advanced chronic heart failure (ACHF). The aim of this trial was to compare boluses and continuous infusion of furosemide in a selected population of patients with ACHF and high risk for diuretic resistance. METHODS: In this single-centre, double-blind, double-dummy, randomized trial, we enrolled 80 patients admitted for acute decompensation of ACHF (NYHA IV, EF ≤ 30%) with criteria of high risk for diuretic resistance (SBP ≤ 110 mmHg, wet score ≥ 12/18, and sodium ≤ 135 mMol/L). Patients were assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive furosemide by bolus every 12 h or by continuous infusion. Diuretic treatment and dummy treatment were prepared by a nurse unassigned to patients' care. The study treatment was continued for up to 72 h. Coprimary endpoints were total urinary output and freedom from congestion at 72 h. RESULTS:80 patients were enrolled with 40 patients in each treatment arm. Mean daily furosemide was 216 mg in continuous-infusion arm and 195 mg in the bolus intermittent arm. Freedom from congestion (defined as jugular venous pressure of < 8 cm, with no orthopnea and with trace peripheral edema or no edema) occurred more in the continuous infusion than in the bolus arm (48% vs. 25%, p = 0.04), while total urinary output after 72 h was 8612 ± 2984 ml in the bolus arm and 10,020 ± 3032 ml in the continuous arm (p = 0.04). Treatment failure occurred less in the continuous-infusion group (15% vs. 38%, p = 0.02), while there was no significant difference between groups in the incidence of worsening of renal function. CONCLUSION: Among patients with acute decompensation of ACHF and high risk of diuretic resistance, continuous infusion of intravenousfurosemide was associated with better decongestion. DRAIN TRIAL: ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT03592836.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Diuretic resistance is a common issue in patients with acute decompensation of advanced chronic heart failure (ACHF). The aim of this trial was to compare boluses and continuous infusion of furosemide in a selected population of patients with ACHF and high risk for diuretic resistance. METHODS: In this single-centre, double-blind, double-dummy, randomized trial, we enrolled 80 patients admitted for acute decompensation of ACHF (NYHA IV, EF ≤ 30%) with criteria of high risk for diuretic resistance (SBP ≤ 110 mmHg, wet score ≥ 12/18, and sodium ≤ 135 mMol/L). Patients were assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive furosemide by bolus every 12 h or by continuous infusion. Diuretic treatment and dummy treatment were prepared by a nurse unassigned to patients' care. The study treatment was continued for up to 72 h. Coprimary endpoints were total urinary output and freedom from congestion at 72 h. RESULTS: 80 patients were enrolled with 40 patients in each treatment arm. Mean daily furosemide was 216 mg in continuous-infusion arm and 195 mg in the bolus intermittent arm. Freedom from congestion (defined as jugular venous pressure of < 8 cm, with no orthopnea and with trace peripheral edema or no edema) occurred more in the continuous infusion than in the bolus arm (48% vs. 25%, p = 0.04), while total urinary output after 72 h was 8612 ± 2984 ml in the bolus arm and 10,020 ± 3032 ml in the continuous arm (p = 0.04). Treatment failure occurred less in the continuous-infusion group (15% vs. 38%, p = 0.02), while there was no significant difference between groups in the incidence of worsening of renal function. CONCLUSION: Among patients with acute decompensation of ACHF and high risk of diuretic resistance, continuous infusion of intravenous furosemide was associated with better decongestion. DRAIN TRIAL: ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT03592836.
Authors: Mattia A E Valente; Adriaan A Voors; Kevin Damman; Dirk J Van Veldhuisen; Barrie M Massie; Christopher M O'Connor; Marco Metra; Piotr Ponikowski; John R Teerlink; Gad Cotter; Beth Davison; John G F Cleland; Michael M Givertz; Daniel M Bloomfield; Mona Fiuzat; Howard C Dittrich; Hans L Hillege Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2014-02-28 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Tien M H Ng; Erica Konopka; Alifiya F Hyderi; Shenche Hshieh; Yuki Tsuji; Brian J Kim; Song Y Han; Duc H Phan; Aaron I Jeng; Mimi Lou; Uri Elkayam Journal: J Cardiovasc Pharmacol Ther Date: 2013-03-27 Impact factor: 2.457
Authors: Marco Metra; Piotr Ponikowski; Kenneth Dickstein; John J V McMurray; Antonello Gavazzi; Claes-Hakan Bergh; Alan G Fraser; Tiny Jaarsma; Antonis Pitsis; Paul Mohacsi; Michael Böhm; Stefan Anker; Henry Dargie; Dirk Brutsaert; Michel Komajda Journal: Eur J Heart Fail Date: 2007-05-03 Impact factor: 15.534
Authors: Giuseppe Ambrosio; Andrea Di Lenarda; Francesco Fedele; Domenico Gabrielli; Marco Metra; Fabrizio Oliva; Gianpiero Perna; Michele Senni; Renata De Maria Journal: G Ital Cardiol (Rome) Date: 2009-07
Authors: Meredith A Brisco; Michael R Zile; Jennifer S Hanberg; F Perry Wilson; Chirag R Parikh; Steven G Coca; W H Wilson Tang; Jeffrey M Testani Journal: J Card Fail Date: 2016-06-30 Impact factor: 5.712
Authors: Piotr Ponikowski; Adriaan A Voors; Stefan D Anker; Héctor Bueno; John G F Cleland; Andrew J S Coats; Volkmar Falk; José Ramón González-Juanatey; Veli-Pekka Harjola; Ewa A Jankowska; Mariell Jessup; Cecilia Linde; Petros Nihoyannopoulos; John T Parissis; Burkert Pieske; Jillian P Riley; Giuseppe M C Rosano; Luis M Ruilope; Frank Ruschitzka; Frans H Rutten; Peter van der Meer Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2016-05-20 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Jonathan S Chávez-Iñiguez; Miguel Ibarra-Estrada; Sergio Sánchez-Villaseca; Gregorio Romero-González; Jorge J Font-Yañez; Andrés De la Torre-Quiroga; Andrés Aranda-G de Quevedo; Alexia Romero-Muñóz; Pablo Maggiani-Aguilera; Gael Chávez-Alonso; Juan Gómez-Fregoso; Guillermo García-García Journal: BMC Nephrol Date: 2022-01-03 Impact factor: 2.388