Key result
Subcutaneous furosemide did not significantly improve the 30-day composite of cardiovascular death, HF events, and NT-proBNP change compared to usual care (win ratio 1.11; 95% CI 0.48-2.50; P=0.806).
Why the study?
Therapies are needed to address worsening congestion without hospitalization in patients with chronic HF.
Does subcutaneous furosemide improve a 30-day hierarchical composite of cardiovascular death, HF events, and change in NT-proBNP compared to usual care in outpatients with chronic heart failure and worsening congestion?
RCT (n=51)
Open-label
2:1
Does subcutaneous furosemide improve a 30-day hierarchical composite of cardiovascular death, HF events, and change in NT-proBNP compared to usual care in outpatients with chronic heart failure and worsening congestion?
Effect estimate: Win ratio 1.11 (95% CI 0.48-2.50)
p-value: p=0.806
In a pilot study of outpatients with worsening heart failure, subcutaneous furosemide did not significantly improve the primary composite clinical endpoint but augmented weight loss and improved dyspnea and functional capacity compared to usual care.
SC furosemide missed primary endpoint in this small pilot; leaves open outpatient decongestion potential pending larger trials.
BACKGROUND: Therapies are needed to address worsening congestion, without hospitalization, in patients with chronic heart failure (HF). OBJECTIVES: This pilot study assessed outcomes of a novel subcutaneous (SC) furosemide formulation compared to usual care in outpatients with worsening congestion. METHODS: Participants with chronic HF and worsening congestion were randomized open-label 2:1 to SC furosemide compared to usual care (UC). Decongestion was estimated by tracking body weight. The primary endpoint was a win ratio of a 30-day hierarchical composite of cardiovascular death, HF events, and change in N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide. Secondary endpoints included dyspnea severity, functional capacity, and quality of life. RESULTS: Thirty-four participants were randomized to SC furosemide and 17 to UC. SC furosemide caused greater reduction in body weight: between-group difference in least square mean change was -2.02 kg at day 3 (95% CI: -3.9 to -0.14; P = 0.035). SC furosemide-to-UC win ratio was 1.11 (95% CI: 0.48-2.50; P = 0.806). Significant between-group least square mean differences favoring SC furosemide occurred in 7-point dyspnea score (P = 0.017) and 6-minute walk test (P = 0.032), with trend in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ)-12 Overall Summary Score of 9.15 (95% CI: 1.95-20.3; P = 0.106). The most common related adverse event with SC furosemide was mild infusion site pain (11.8%). CONCLUSIONS: SC furosemide augmented weight loss in patients with HF and worsening congestion. The composite primary endpoint was not statistically significant in this pilot investigation. However, findings of improved dyspnea scores and functional capacity, with favorable trend in KCCQ-12 score, warrant additional investigation to further document the clinical value of SC furosemide as an alternative to hospitalization (AT HOME-HF [Avoiding Treatment in the Hospital With Furoscix for the Management of Congestion in Heart Failure-A Pilot Study]; NCT04593823).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Konstam et al. (2024) conducted an RCT in Chronic heart failure with worsening congestion (n=51). Subcutaneous furosemide vs. Usual care was evaluated on 30-day hierarchical composite of cardiovascular death, HF events, and change in N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (Win ratio 1.11, 95% CI 0.48-2.50, p=0.806). Subcutaneous furosemide did not significantly improve the 30-day composite of cardiovascular death, HF events, and NT-proBNP change compared to usual care (win ratio 1.11; 95% CI 0.48-2.50; P=0.806).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: