Key result
In outpatients with chronic heart failure, increasing loop diuretic dose was associated with a higher risk of heart failure death compared to no change (HR 1.53; 95% CI 1.12-2.08; P=0.008).
Why the study?
Guidelines recommend down-titration of loop diuretics once euvolaemia is achieved, but loop diuretic dose changes in daily cardiology practice and their association with outcomes remained to be investigated.
Are loop diuretic dose changes associated with outcomes in outpatients with chronic heart failure?
Cohort (n=8,130)
Yes
Are loop diuretic dose changes associated with outcomes in outpatients with chronic heart failure?
Hazard Ratio: 1.53 (95% CI 1.12–2.08)
p-value: p=0.008
In outpatients with chronic heart failure, increasing loop diuretic dose is associated with higher HF mortality, whereas successful down-titration is predicted by higher systolic blood pressure and absence of congestion.
Treat rising loop diuretic doses as a high-risk signal requiring closer review; leaves open causality and should not yet change practice.
AIMS: Guidelines recommend down-titration of loop diuretics (LD) once euvolaemia is achieved. In outpatients with heart failure (HF), we investigated LD dose changes in daily cardiology practice, agreement with guideline recommendations, predictors of successful LD down-titration and association between dose changes and outcomes. METHODS AND RESULTS: We included 8130 HF patients from the ESC-EORP Heart Failure Long-Term Registry. Among patients who had dose decreased, successful decrease was defined as the decrease not followed by death, HF hospitalization, New York Heart Association class deterioration, or subsequent increase in LD dose. Mean age was 66 ± 13 years, 71% men, 62% HF with reduced ejection fraction, 19% HF with mid-range ejection fraction, 19% HF with preserved ejection fraction. Median [interquartile range (IQR)] LD dose was 40 (25-80) mg. LD dose was increased in 16%, decreased in 8.3% and unchanged in 76%. Median (IQR) follow-up was 372 (363-419) days. Diuretic dose increase (vs. no change) was associated with HF death [hazard ratio (HR) 1.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.12-2.08; P = 0.008] and nominally with cardiovascular death (HR 1.25, 95% CI 0.96-1.63; P = 0.103). Decrease of diuretic dose (vs. no change) was associated with nominally lower HF (HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.33-1.07; P = 0.083) and cardiovascular mortality (HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.38-1.00; P = 0.052). Among patients who had LD dose decreased, systolic blood pressure [odds ratio (OR) 1.11 per 10 mmHg increase, 95% CI 1.01-1.22; P = 0.032], and absence of (i) sleep apnoea (OR 0.24, 95% CI 0.09-0.69; P = 0.008), (ii) peripheral congestion (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.29-0.80; P = 0.005), and (iii) moderate/severe mitral regurgitation (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.37-0.87; P = 0.008) were independently associated with successful decrease. CONCLUSION: Diuretic dose was unchanged in 76% and decreased in 8.3% of outpatients with chronic HF. LD dose increase was associated with worse outcomes, while the LD dose decrease group showed a trend for better outcomes compared with the no-change group. Higher systolic blood pressure, and absence of (i) sleep apnoea, (ii) peripheral congestion, and (iii) moderate/severe mitral regurgitation were independently associated with successful dose decrease.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kapelios et al. (2020) conducted a cohort in Chronic Heart Failure (n=8,130). Loop diuretic dose increase vs. No change in loop diuretic dose was evaluated on Heart failure death (HR 1.53, 95% CI 1.12-2.08, p=0.008). In outpatients with chronic heart failure, increasing loop diuretic dose was associated with a higher risk of heart failure death compared to no change (HR 1.53; 95% CI 1.12-2.08; P=0.008).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: