Kissling Kevin T, Pickworth Kerry K
Department of Pharmacy, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio.
Pharmacotherapy. 2014 Aug;34(8):882-7. doi: 10.1002/phar.1456. Epub 2014 Jul 3.
To compare the effects of combination diuretic therapy with oral hydrochlorothiazide or intravenous chlorothiazide added to background intravenous loop diuretic therapy among patients hospitalized with heart failure.
Single-center, retrospective review.
Cardiovascular hospital within a university-affiliated teaching institution.
Eighty-two patients hospitalized for heart failure between September 1, 2009, and August 31, 2011, who were receiving background intravenous furosemide therapy (total daily dose ≥ 160 mg); of those patients, 28 patients also received oral hydrochlorothiazide (median dose 25 mg [interquartile range 25-50 mg]), and 54 patients also received intravenous chlorothiazide (median dose 500 mg [interquartile range 250-750 mg]).
The primary outcome was change in 24-hour urine output. Urine output was recorded from the 24 hours before and after the first administration of either oral hydrochlorothiazide or intravenous chlorothiazide. Baseline characteristics, with the exception of female sex (p=0.01) and home loop diuretic dose (p=0.03), were similar between groups. Twenty-four-hour urine output before administration of the thiazide diuretic was not significantly different between groups. After treatment, 24-hour urine output increased in both groups; however, urine output increased to a lesser extent with oral hydrochlorothiazide (from mean ± SD 2104 ± 830 ml to 3038 ± 917 ml) than with intravenous chlorothiazide (from 2342 ± 978 ml to 4128 ± 1755 ml) (p=0.005). Hypokalemia occurred frequently in both groups: 71.4% and 83.3% in the oral hydrochlorothiazide and intravenous chlorothiazide groups, respectively (p=0.21).
Among hospitalized patients with heart failure receiving intravenous loop diuretics, the addition of either oral hydrochlorothiazide or intravenous chlorothiazide augmented diuresis. Urine output increased to a greater extent with intravenous chlorothiazide compared with oral hydrochlorothiazide. However, given the positive response observed, ease of administration, and lower drug cost, oral hydrochlorothiazide should still be considered as an option for combination diuretic therapy in this patient population.
比较在接受静脉襻利尿剂治疗的心力衰竭住院患者中,联合使用口服氢氯噻嗪或静脉注射氯噻嗪与背景静脉襻利尿剂治疗的效果。
单中心回顾性研究。
大学附属教学机构内的心血管医院。
2009年9月1日至2011年8月31日期间因心力衰竭住院且正在接受背景静脉注射呋塞米治疗(每日总剂量≥160mg)的82例患者;其中,28例患者还接受了口服氢氯噻嗪(中位剂量25mg[四分位间距25 - 50mg]),54例患者还接受了静脉注射氯噻嗪(中位剂量500mg[四分位间距250 - 750mg])。
主要结局是24小时尿量的变化。在首次给予口服氢氯噻嗪或静脉注射氯噻嗪之前及之后的24小时记录尿量。除女性(p = 0.01)和家庭襻利尿剂剂量(p = 0.03)外,两组间基线特征相似。在给予噻嗪类利尿剂之前,两组间的24小时尿量无显著差异。治疗后,两组的24小时尿量均增加;然而,口服氢氯噻嗪组的尿量增加幅度(从均值±标准差2104±830ml增至3038±917ml)小于静脉注射氯噻嗪组(从2342±978ml增至4128±1755ml)(p = 0.005)。两组低钾血症均频繁发生:口服氢氯噻嗪组和静脉注射氯噻嗪组分别为71.4%和83.3%(p = 0.21)。
在接受静脉襻利尿剂治疗的心力衰竭住院患者中,添加口服氢氯噻嗪或静脉注射氯噻嗪均可增强利尿作用。与口服氢氯噻嗪相比,静脉注射氯噻嗪使尿量增加幅度更大。然而,鉴于观察到的阳性反应、给药便利性及较低的药物成本,口服氢氯噻嗪仍应被视为该患者群体联合利尿剂治疗的一种选择。