Comparative Analysis of Long-Term Outcomes of Torasemide and Furosemide in Heart Failure Patients in Heart Failure Registries of the European Society of Cardiology
- 53 Downloads
Current clinical recommendations do not emphasise superiority of any of diuretics, but available reports are very encouraging and suggest beneficial effects of torasemide. This study aimed to compare the effect of torasemide and furosemide on long-term outcomes and New York Heart Association (NYHA) class change in patients with chronic heart failure (HF).
Of 2019 patients enrolled in Polish parts of the heart failure registries of the European Society of Cardiology (Pilot and Long-Term), 1440 patients treated with a loop diuretic were included in the analysis. The main analysis was performed on matched cohorts of HF patients treated with furosemide and torasemide using propensity score matching.
Torasemide was associated with a similar primary endpoint (all-cause death; 9.8% vs. 14.1%; p = 0.13) occurrence and 23.8% risk reduction of the secondary endpoint (a composite of all-cause death or hospitalisation for worsening HF; 26.4% vs. 34.7%; p = 0.04). Treatment with both torasemide and furosemide was associated with the significantly most frequent occurrence of the primary (23.8%) and secondary (59.2%) endpoints. In the matched cohort after 12 months, NYHA class was higher in the furosemide group (p = 0.04), while furosemide use was associated with a higher risk (20.0% vs. 12.9%; p = 0.03) of worsening ≥ 1 NYHA class. Torasemide use impacted positively upon the primary endpoint occurrence, especially in younger patients (aged < 65 years) and with dilated cardiomyopathy.
Our findings contribute to the body of research on the optimal diuretic choice. Torasemide may have advantageous influence on NYHA class and long-term outcomes of HF patients, especially younger patients or those with dilated cardiomyopathy, but it needs further investigations in prospective randomised trials.
KeywordsHeart failure Loop diuretic Furosemide Torasemide
KO conceived of the idea for the study and performed the statistical analysis. KO and PB designed the analysis, conducted the data interpretation and wrote the manuscript. KO, PB, AKC, AT, RK, MG, MP, AW and MM researched the data. KJF and GO reviewed the manuscript. MGCL and APM designed and coordinated the registries. JD coordinated the registry nationwide. All authors edited and approved the final version of the manuscript.
The study is financed from the statutory funds of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC).
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors. All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- 1.Ponikowski P, Voors AA, Anker SD, Bueno H, Cleland JG, Coats AJ, et al. 2016 ESC guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure: the Task Force for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Acute and Chronic Heart Failure of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) developed with the special contribution of the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the ESC. Eur Heart J. 2016;37:2129–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 4.Maggioni AP, Anker SD, Dahlstrom U, Filippatos G, Ponikowski P, Zannad F, et al. Are hospitalized or ambulatory patients with heart failure treated in accordance with European Society of Cardiology guidelines? Evidence from 12,440 patients of the ESC Heart Failure Long-Term Registry. Eur J Heart Fail. 2013;15:1173–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 9.Harada K, Izawa H, Nishizawa T, Hirashiki A, Murase Y, Kobayashi M, et al. Beneficial effects of torasemide on systolic wall stress and sympathetic nervous activity in asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic patients with heart failure: comparison with azosemide. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol. 2009;53:468–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.Balsam P, Tyminska A, Kaplon-Cieslicka A, Ozieranski K, Peller M, Galas M, et al. Predictors of one-year outcome in patients hospitalised for heart failure: results from the Polish part of the Heart Failure Pilot Survey of the European Society of Cardiology. Kardiol Pol. 2016;74:9–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.Kaplon-Cieslicka A, Tyminska A, Peller M, Balsam P, Ozieranski K, Galas M, et al. Diagnosis, clinical course, and 1-year outcome in patients hospitalized for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (from the Polish cohort of the European Society of Cardiology Heart Failure Long-Term Registry). Am J Cardiol. 2016;118:535–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 15.Austin PC, Jembere N, Chiu M. Propensity score matching and complex surveys. Stat Methods Med Res. 2018;27:1240–57.Google Scholar
- 24.Ozierański K, Kapłon-Cieślicka A, Balsam P, Tymińska A, Wancerz A, Peller M, et al. Do β-blockers improve one-year survival in heart failure patients with atrial fibrillation? Results from the ESC-HF Registry. Pol Arch Intern Med. 2018.Google Scholar
- 27.Ballester MR, Roig E, Gich I, Puntes M, Delgadillo J, Santos B, et al. Randomized, open-label, blinded-endpoint, crossover, single-dose study to compare the pharmacodynamics of torasemide-PR 10 mg, torasemide-IR 10 mg, and furosemide-IR 40 mg, in patients with chronic heart failure. Drug Des Devel Ther. 2015;9:4291–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 31.Mamcarz A, Filipiak KJ, Drozdz J, Nessler J, Tykarski A, Niemczyk M, et al. Loop diuretics: old and new ones—which one to choose in clinical practice? Experts’ group consensus endorsed by the Polish Cardiac Society Working Group on Cardiovascular Pharmacotherapy and Working Group on Heart Failure. Kardiol Pol. 2015;73:225–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar