European heart journal · 2019
Short-term diuretic withdrawal in stable outpatients with mild heart failure and no fluid retention receiving optimal therapy: a double-blind, multicentre, randomized trial.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Rohde Luis E, Rover Marciane M, Figueiredo Neto Jose A, Danzmann Luiz C, Bertoldi Eduardo G, Simões Marcus V, Silvestre Odilson M, Ribeiro Antonio L P, Moura Lidia Zytynski, Beck-da-Silva Luis, Prado Debora, Sant'Anna Roberto T, Bridi Leonardo H, Zimerman André, Raupp da Rosa Priscila, Biolo Andréia
Аннотация
AIMS: Although loop diuretics are widely used to treat heart failure (HF), there is scarce contemporary data to guide diuretic adjustments in the outpatient setting.
METHODS AND RESULTS: In a prospective, randomized and double-blind protocol, we tested the safety and tolerability of withdrawing low-dose furosemide in stable HF outpatients at 11 HF clinics in Brazil. The trial had two blindly adjudicated co-primary outcomes: (i) symptoms assessment quantified as the area under the curve (AUC) of a dyspnoea score on a visual-analogue scale evaluated at 4 time-points (baseline, Day 15, Day 45, and Day 90) and (ii) the proportion of patients maintained without diuretic reuse during follow-up. We enrolled 188 patients (25% females; 59 ± 13 years old; left ventricular ejection fraction = 32 ± 8%) that were randomized to furosemide withdrawal (n = 95) or maintenance (n = 93). For the first co-primary endpoint, no significant difference in patients' assessment of dyspnoea was observed in the comparison of furosemide withdrawal with continuous administration [median AUC 1875 (interquartile range, IQR 383-3360) and 1541 (IQR 474-3124), respectively; P = 0.94]. For the second co-primary endpoint, 70 patients (75.3%) in the withdrawal group and 77 patients (83.7%) in the maintenance group were free of furosemide reuse during follow-up (odds ratio for additional furosemide use with withdrawal 1.69, 95% confidence interval 0.82-3.49; P = 0.16). Heart failure-related events (hospitalizations, emergency room visits, and deaths) were infrequent and similar between groups (P = 1.0).
CONCLUSIONS: Diuretic withdrawal did not result in neither increased self-perception of dyspnoea nor increased need of furosemide reuse. Diuretic discontinuation may deserve consideration in stable outpatients with no signs of fluid retention receiving optimal medical therapy.
CLINICALTRIALS.GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT02689180.
METHODS AND RESULTS: In a prospective, randomized and double-blind protocol, we tested the safety and tolerability of withdrawing low-dose furosemide in stable HF outpatients at 11 HF clinics in Brazil. The trial had two blindly adjudicated co-primary outcomes: (i) symptoms assessment quantified as the area under the curve (AUC) of a dyspnoea score on a visual-analogue scale evaluated at 4 time-points (baseline, Day 15, Day 45, and Day 90) and (ii) the proportion of patients maintained without diuretic reuse during follow-up. We enrolled 188 patients (25% females; 59 ± 13 years old; left ventricular ejection fraction = 32 ± 8%) that were randomized to furosemide withdrawal (n = 95) or maintenance (n = 93). For the first co-primary endpoint, no significant difference in patients' assessment of dyspnoea was observed in the comparison of furosemide withdrawal with continuous administration [median AUC 1875 (interquartile range, IQR 383-3360) and 1541 (IQR 474-3124), respectively; P = 0.94]. For the second co-primary endpoint, 70 patients (75.3%) in the withdrawal group and 77 patients (83.7%) in the maintenance group were free of furosemide reuse during follow-up (odds ratio for additional furosemide use with withdrawal 1.69, 95% confidence interval 0.82-3.49; P = 0.16). Heart failure-related events (hospitalizations, emergency room visits, and deaths) were infrequent and similar between groups (P = 1.0).
CONCLUSIONS: Diuretic withdrawal did not result in neither increased self-perception of dyspnoea nor increased need of furosemide reuse. Diuretic discontinuation may deserve consideration in stable outpatients with no signs of fluid retention receiving optimal medical therapy.
CLINICALTRIALS.GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT02689180.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
AgedBody FluidsBrazilCase-Control StudiesDouble-Blind MethodDyspneaFemaleFollow-Up StudiesFurosemideHeart FailureHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesSafetySelf ConceptSodium Potassium Chloride Symporter InhibitorsTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeVentricular Function, LeftVisual Analog ScaleWithholding Treatment