Vasavada Nina, Saha Chandan, Agarwal Rajiv
Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine, and Richard L. Roudebush VA Medical Center, Indianapolis, Indiana 46202, USA.
Kidney Int. 2003 Aug;64(2):632-40. doi: 10.1046/j.1523-1755.2003.00124.x.
Torsemide has predictable absorption compared to furosemide. Thereby, torsemide results in more constant exposure to active drug. Our hypothesis was that this pharmacokinetic difference between these commonly used loop diuretics may translate into disparate antihypertensive responses in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD).
We conducted a randomized, double-blind, two-period, crossover trial to compare the pharmacodynamics of torsemide and furosemide, in 14 subjects with stage 2 or 3 CKD. We first performed an inpatient study, where after the subjects were brought into sodium balance on a 200 mEq per day diet, a single bioequivalent dose of oral loop diuretic was administered with an intervening washout period. Measurements of urinary electrolytes were made. Subjects then participated in an outpatient study, wherein they received daily therapy for 3 weeks with the loop diuretics in random order. Twenty four-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring was performed before and after each drug to assess the antihypertensive response.
In the inpatient phase, furosemide increased urinary sodium excretion from average (+/-SD) 199 +/- 49 mEq/day to 357 +/- 96 mEq/day and torsemide increased urinary sodium excretion from 213 +/- 79 mEq/day to 398 +/- 142 mEq/day. These differences between the diuretics were not significant, confirming bioequivalence. In the outpatient phase, furosemide reduced 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure from 147 +/- 17/78 +/- 11 mm Hg to 138 +/- 21/74 +/- 12 mm Hg (P = 0.021) and torsemide reduced it from 143 +/- 18/75 +/- 10 mm Hg to 133 +/- 19/71 +/- 10 mm Hg (P = 0.007). Although each diuretic was effective in reducing ambulatory blood pressure, the differences between diuretics were not statistically significant.
Bioequivalent doses of torsemide and furosemide given in a randomized, double-blind design fail to demonstrate superiority of torsemide with respect to natriuresis or 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure control in subjects with stages 2 and 3 CKD.
与呋塞米相比,托拉塞米的吸收具有可预测性。因此,托拉塞米能使活性药物的暴露更稳定。我们的假设是,这些常用袢利尿剂之间的这种药代动力学差异可能会导致慢性肾脏病(CKD)患者出现不同的降压反应。
我们进行了一项随机、双盲、两阶段、交叉试验,以比较14名2期或3期CKD患者中托拉塞米和呋塞米的药效学。我们首先进行了一项住院研究,在让受试者采用每天200 mEq的饮食使钠平衡后,给予单剂量生物等效的口服袢利尿剂,并设置一个中间洗脱期。测量尿电解质。受试者随后参与一项门诊研究,在该研究中他们随机序贯接受3周的袢利尿剂每日治疗。在每种药物治疗前后进行24小时动态血压监测,以评估降压反应。
在住院阶段,呋塞米使尿钠排泄量从平均(±标准差)199±49 mEq/天增加到357±96 mEq/天,托拉塞米使尿钠排泄量从213±79 mEq/天增加到398±142 mEq/天。这两种利尿剂之间的这些差异不显著,证实了生物等效性。在门诊阶段,呋塞米使24小时动态血压从147±17/78±11 mmHg降至138±21/74±12 mmHg(P = 0.021),托拉塞米使血压从143±18/75±10 mmHg降至133±19/71±10 mmHg(P = 0.007)。虽然每种利尿剂在降低动态血压方面都有效,但利尿剂之间的差异无统计学意义。
在2期和3期CKD受试者中,以随机、双盲设计给予生物等效剂量的托拉塞米和呋塞米,未能证明托拉塞米在利钠或24小时动态血压控制方面具有优越性。