Key result
Oral furosemide was generally safe and well tolerated in hemodialysis patients, but only 33% of participants met the urine output efficacy threshold at week 5.
Why the study?
Diuretic use may reduce volume-related complications in hemodialysis, but the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of furosemide in this population needed evaluation.
Does oral furosemide improve 24-hour urine volume in patients receiving maintenance hemodialysis?
Does oral furosemide improve 24-hour urine volume in patients receiving maintenance hemodialysis?
In a pilot study of hemodialysis patients, oral furosemide was safe and well-tolerated but only achieved the target increase in urine output in about one-third of participants.
Furosemide titration appears feasible in HD patients with residual urine; leaves open efficacy for volume complications in larger trials.
Introduction Diuretic use may reduce volume-related complications in hemodialysis. We evaluated the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of furosemide in patients with hemodialysis-dependent kidney failure. Methods We conducted an open label, single-arm, 18-week, dose titration pilot study of oral furosemide (maximum dose 320 mg/day) among patients receiving maintenance hemodialysis who reported at least 1 cup of urine output per day. The primary efficacy outcome was an increase from baseline to a specified threshold of 24-hour urine volume, with the threshold based on baseline urine volume (<200 ml/day vs. ≥200 ml/day). Safety outcomes included hypokalemia and hypomagnesemia, and tolerability was assessed by prespecified patient-reported symptoms. Results Of the 39 participants, 28 (72%) received the expected furosemide dose, 3 (8%) underwent dose reduction, 5 (12%) discontinued furosemide without dose reduction, and 3 (8%) underwent dose reduction and subsequently discontinued furosemide. The median (quartile 1, quartile 3) baseline 24-hour urine volume was 290 ml (110, 740), and the maximum, average daily study furosemide dose ranged from 69 mg/day to 320 mg/d. The urine output efficacy outcome was met by 12 (33%), 11 (33%), and 7 (22%) participants at weeks 5, 12, and 18, respectively, in the intention-to-treat analysis, and by 12 (39%), 9 (35%), and 7 (28%) participants at weeks 5, 12, and 18, respectively, in the on-treatment analysis. There were no electrolyte, furosemide level, or patient-reported hearing change safety events. Conclusion Furosemide was generally safe and well tolerated, but only one-third of participants met the efficacy definition at week 5. The clinical importance of the efficacy findings is uncertain.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Flythe et al. (2022) studied hemodialysis-dependent kidney failure (n=39). Oral furosemide was evaluated on Increase from baseline to a specified threshold of 24-hour urine volume. Oral furosemide was generally safe and well tolerated in hemodialysis patients, but only 33% of participants met the urine output efficacy threshold at week 5.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: