H. Bendoudouch , B. El Boussaadani , L. Hara , A. Ech-Chenbouli , Z. Raissouni
{"title":"急性心力衰竭患者初始静脉利尿剂剂量的影响","authors":"H. Bendoudouch , B. El Boussaadani , L. Hara , A. Ech-Chenbouli , Z. Raissouni","doi":"10.1016/j.acvd.2024.10.046","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>Acute heart failure is a frequent motive for emergency admissions. Intravenous loop diuretics remain the cornerstone of its management, yet its optimal initial dose remains controversial</div></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><div>Comparison of initial furosemide dose between ER practicians and both guidelines & cardiology specialists, analysis of clinical improvement in the 3 categories, analysis of lack of clinical improvement in the 3 categories in relation with creatinine serum levels</div></div><div><h3>Method</h3><div>The present study included 300 patients from the Emergency Room. Anthropometric & clinical elements were noted, as well as heart risk factors & anterior therapeutics. Patients were divided into two groups depending on their oral diuretic intake. They were further classified into three IV bolus categories: Optimal, More & Less, following guidelines. Clinical elements including diuresis and congestion physical signs were noted after 24<!--> <!-->h.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>In our study, 36.3% of our patients are on diuretic regimen, whereas 63.7% never received diuretics. Globally, emergency practicians indicated initial doses similar to the cardiologist assessment 36.7% of the, whereas it was different 63.7% of the time, mostly higher doses (36%). After dividing patients by their anterior diuretic intake, we found that emergency practicians tend to give higher doses to diuretic free patients (47.4%), whereas they mostly don’t increase diuretic doses for patients who are already on diuretics (18.2%), with sometimes even lower boluses (36.4%). Patients in the Optimal category had 81.8% adequate mean diuresis after 24<!--> <!-->h, as well as 85% clinical congestion improvement. Patients in the Less category had 60% adequate diuresis, and only 40% clinical improvement, with some worsening cases (8%). Patients in the More category had 81.8% adequate diuresis, as well as 85% clinical improvement. Patients in the More category had 76,9% adequate mean diuresis after 24<!--> <!-->h, less than in the Optimal category, and only 80% clinical congestion improvement (<span><span>Fig. 1</span></span>). Through analysis by Logistic Regression, we found that the unimprovement of congestion in the Low category isn’t related to creatinine serum levels. We also found that patients who didn’t improve with Optimal category doses didn’t have higher creatinine serum levels.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Our study shows that guidelines-based initial diuretic doses are effective on congestion improvement after 24<!--> <!-->h, and consequently should be followed by all medical practicians.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":55472,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Cardiovascular Diseases","volume":"118 1","pages":"Page S46"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Outcomes of initial intravenous diuretic dose in Acute heart failure\",\"authors\":\"H. Bendoudouch , B. El Boussaadani , L. Hara , A. Ech-Chenbouli , Z. Raissouni\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.acvd.2024.10.046\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>Acute heart failure is a frequent motive for emergency admissions. Intravenous loop diuretics remain the cornerstone of its management, yet its optimal initial dose remains controversial</div></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><div>Comparison of initial furosemide dose between ER practicians and both guidelines & cardiology specialists, analysis of clinical improvement in the 3 categories, analysis of lack of clinical improvement in the 3 categories in relation with creatinine serum levels</div></div><div><h3>Method</h3><div>The present study included 300 patients from the Emergency Room. Anthropometric & clinical elements were noted, as well as heart risk factors & anterior therapeutics. Patients were divided into two groups depending on their oral diuretic intake. They were further classified into three IV bolus categories: Optimal, More & Less, following guidelines. Clinical elements including diuresis and congestion physical signs were noted after 24<!--> <!-->h.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>In our study, 36.3% of our patients are on diuretic regimen, whereas 63.7% never received diuretics. Globally, emergency practicians indicated initial doses similar to the cardiologist assessment 36.7% of the, whereas it was different 63.7% of the time, mostly higher doses (36%). After dividing patients by their anterior diuretic intake, we found that emergency practicians tend to give higher doses to diuretic free patients (47.4%), whereas they mostly don’t increase diuretic doses for patients who are already on diuretics (18.2%), with sometimes even lower boluses (36.4%). Patients in the Optimal category had 81.8% adequate mean diuresis after 24<!--> <!-->h, as well as 85% clinical congestion improvement. Patients in the Less category had 60% adequate diuresis, and only 40% clinical improvement, with some worsening cases (8%). Patients in the More category had 81.8% adequate diuresis, as well as 85% clinical improvement. Patients in the More category had 76,9% adequate mean diuresis after 24<!--> <!-->h, less than in the Optimal category, and only 80% clinical congestion improvement (<span><span>Fig. 1</span></span>). Through analysis by Logistic Regression, we found that the unimprovement of congestion in the Low category isn’t related to creatinine serum levels. We also found that patients who didn’t improve with Optimal category doses didn’t have higher creatinine serum levels.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Our study shows that guidelines-based initial diuretic doses are effective on congestion improvement after 24<!--> <!-->h, and consequently should be followed by all medical practicians.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55472,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Archives of Cardiovascular Diseases\",\"volume\":\"118 1\",\"pages\":\"Page S46\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Archives of Cardiovascular Diseases\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1875213624003917\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/15 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Cardiovascular Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1875213624003917","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
急性心力衰竭是急诊就诊的常见原因。静脉袢利尿剂仍然是其治疗的基石,但其最佳初始剂量仍存在争议。目的比较急诊医师与两份指南之间呋塞米初始剂量的差异。心脏科专家分析3类临床改善情况,分析3类临床改善不足与血清肌酐水平的关系方法本研究纳入300例急诊患者。人体测量,临床因素和心脏危险因素都被注意到了。前治疗。根据患者口服利尿剂的摄入量将患者分为两组。它们进一步分为三种静脉丸:Optimal, More &;更少,遵循指导方针。结果36.3%的患者采用利尿方案,63.7%的患者从未使用过利尿剂。在全球范围内,36.7%的急诊医生的初始剂量与心脏病专家的评估相似,而63.7%的情况不同,大多数是更高的剂量(36%)。在将患者按前路利尿剂摄入量进行分组后,我们发现急诊医生倾向于给未使用利尿剂的患者更高的剂量(47.4%),而对已经使用利尿剂的患者大多不增加利尿剂剂量(18.2%),有时甚至更低的剂量(36.4%)。最佳组患者24 h后平均利尿充足率为81.8%,临床充血改善率为85%。Less类患者有60%的利尿足够,只有40%的临床改善,有一些恶化的病例(8%)。More组患者利尿充足率为81.8%,临床改善率为85%。More类患者24 h后平均利尿充足率为76.9%,低于Optimal类,临床充血改善率仅为80%(图1)。通过Logistic回归分析,我们发现Low类患者充血未改善与血清肌酐水平无关。我们还发现,未使用最佳类别剂量改善的患者血清肌酐水平并不高。结论本研究表明,以指南为基础的初始利尿剂剂量对24 h后充血的改善是有效的,因此应得到所有医生的遵循。
Outcomes of initial intravenous diuretic dose in Acute heart failure
Introduction
Acute heart failure is a frequent motive for emergency admissions. Intravenous loop diuretics remain the cornerstone of its management, yet its optimal initial dose remains controversial
Objective
Comparison of initial furosemide dose between ER practicians and both guidelines & cardiology specialists, analysis of clinical improvement in the 3 categories, analysis of lack of clinical improvement in the 3 categories in relation with creatinine serum levels
Method
The present study included 300 patients from the Emergency Room. Anthropometric & clinical elements were noted, as well as heart risk factors & anterior therapeutics. Patients were divided into two groups depending on their oral diuretic intake. They were further classified into three IV bolus categories: Optimal, More & Less, following guidelines. Clinical elements including diuresis and congestion physical signs were noted after 24 h.
Results
In our study, 36.3% of our patients are on diuretic regimen, whereas 63.7% never received diuretics. Globally, emergency practicians indicated initial doses similar to the cardiologist assessment 36.7% of the, whereas it was different 63.7% of the time, mostly higher doses (36%). After dividing patients by their anterior diuretic intake, we found that emergency practicians tend to give higher doses to diuretic free patients (47.4%), whereas they mostly don’t increase diuretic doses for patients who are already on diuretics (18.2%), with sometimes even lower boluses (36.4%). Patients in the Optimal category had 81.8% adequate mean diuresis after 24 h, as well as 85% clinical congestion improvement. Patients in the Less category had 60% adequate diuresis, and only 40% clinical improvement, with some worsening cases (8%). Patients in the More category had 81.8% adequate diuresis, as well as 85% clinical improvement. Patients in the More category had 76,9% adequate mean diuresis after 24 h, less than in the Optimal category, and only 80% clinical congestion improvement (Fig. 1). Through analysis by Logistic Regression, we found that the unimprovement of congestion in the Low category isn’t related to creatinine serum levels. We also found that patients who didn’t improve with Optimal category doses didn’t have higher creatinine serum levels.
Conclusion
Our study shows that guidelines-based initial diuretic doses are effective on congestion improvement after 24 h, and consequently should be followed by all medical practicians.
期刊介绍:
The Journal publishes original peer-reviewed clinical and research articles, epidemiological studies, new methodological clinical approaches, review articles and editorials. Topics covered include coronary artery and valve diseases, interventional and pediatric cardiology, cardiovascular surgery, cardiomyopathy and heart failure, arrhythmias and stimulation, cardiovascular imaging, vascular medicine and hypertension, epidemiology and risk factors, and large multicenter studies. Archives of Cardiovascular Diseases also publishes abstracts of papers presented at the annual sessions of the Journées Européennes de la Société Française de Cardiologie and the guidelines edited by the French Society of Cardiology.