Suppr超能文献

托拉塞米与呋塞米用于心力衰竭患者的比较:来自杜克大学医院的见解

Torsemide versus furosemide in heart failure patients: insights from Duke University Hospital.

作者信息

Mentz Robert J, Buggey Jonathan, Fiuzat Mona, Ersbøll Mads K, Schulte Phillip J, DeVore Adam D, Eisenstein Eric L, Anstrom Kevin J, OʼConnor Christopher M, Velazquez Eric J

机构信息

*Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC; †Department of Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC; and ‡Department of Cardiology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.

出版信息

J Cardiovasc Pharmacol. 2015 May;65(5):438-43. doi: 10.1097/FJC.0000000000000212.

Abstract

Furosemide has historically been the primary loop diuretic in heart failure patients despite data suggesting potential advantages with torsemide. We used the Duke Echocardiography Lab Database to investigate patients admitted with heart failure to Duke Hospital from 2000 to 2010 who were discharged on either torsemide or furosemide. We described baseline characteristics based on discharge diuretic and assessed the relationship with all-cause mortality through 5 years. Of 4580 patients, 86% (n = 3955) received furosemide and 14% (n = 625) received torsemide. Patients receiving torsemide were more likely to be female and had more comorbidities compared with furosemide-treated patients. Survival was worse in torsemide-treated patients [5-year Kaplan-Meier estimated survival of 41.4% (95% CI: 36.7-46.0) vs. 51.5% (95% CI: 49.8-53.1)]. After risk adjustment, torsemide use was no longer associated with increased mortality (hazard ratio 1.16; 95% CI: 0.98-1.38; P = 0.0864). Prospective trials are needed to investigate the effect of torsemide versus furosemide because of the potential for residual confounding.

摘要

尽管有数据表明托拉塞米可能具有优势,但呋塞米一直以来都是心力衰竭患者的主要袢利尿剂。我们利用杜克超声心动图实验室数据库,对2000年至2010年入住杜克医院且出院时使用托拉塞米或呋塞米的心力衰竭患者进行了调查。我们根据出院时使用的利尿剂描述了基线特征,并评估了与5年全因死亡率的关系。在4580例患者中,86%(n = 3955)接受了呋塞米治疗,14%(n = 625)接受了托拉塞米治疗。与接受呋塞米治疗的患者相比,接受托拉塞米治疗的患者更可能为女性,且合并症更多。接受托拉塞米治疗的患者生存率更低[5年Kaplan-Meier估计生存率为41.4%(95%CI:36.7 - 46.0),而接受呋塞米治疗的患者为51.5%(95%CI:49.8 - 53.1)]。经过风险调整后,使用托拉塞米与死亡率增加不再相关(风险比1.16;95%CI:0.98 - 1.38;P = 0.0864)。由于存在残余混杂因素的可能性,需要进行前瞻性试验来研究托拉塞米与呋塞米的疗效差异。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

10
Improving Postdischarge Outcomes in Acute Heart Failure.改善急性心力衰竭出院后的预后
Am J Ther. 2018 Jul/Aug;25(4):e475-e486. doi: 10.1097/MJT.0000000000000791.

本文引用的文献

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验