Management of diuretic-refractory, volume-overloaded patients with acutely decompensated heart failure

Ultrafiltration versus intravenous diuretic therapy to treat acute heart failure: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Patients with decompensated heart failure frequently present with volume overload, which is conventionally treated with diuretics. These drugs have been associated with several adverse effects, including increased mortality, leading some clinicians to propose ultrafiltration as a safe alternative to remove sodium and water.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of our study was to compare the safety and efficacy of ultrafiltration and conventional intravenous diuretic therapy for patients with acute heart failure and volume overload.

DATA SOURCES

We searched the following databases through November 2012: Cochrane Library (1993-), PubMed (1988-), OVID (1984-), EBSCO (1984-), CBM (1978-), VIP (1989-), and CNKI (1979-). In addition, we manually searched relevant references and review articles.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy of ultrafiltration and intravenous diuretics in patients diagnosed with hypervolemic acute heart failure were included. Five trials were found to satisfy all the inclusion criteria.

STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS

Two reviewers independently determined study eligibility, assessed methodological quality and extracted the data. We analyzed the data and pooled them, when appropriate, using Revman 5.0. We assessed the risk of bias in the included studies using guidelines in the Cochrane Handbook 5.0 for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, taking into account sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding, incomplete outcome data, and selective outcome reporting.

RESULTS

Data from the initial phase of five trials involving 477 participants were included. Meta-analysis of the pooled data showed that ultrafiltration was significantly better than diuretic drugs based on 48-h weight loss (Z = 3.72; P < 0.001, weighted mean difference [WMD] = 1.25 kg, 95 % CI 0.59-1.91) and based on 48-h fluid removal (Z = 4.23; P < 0.001, WMD = 1.06 L, 95 % CI 0.57-1.56). Adverse events did not differ significantly between the ultrafiltration and intravenous diuretic treatment groups.

LIMITATIONS

There are several limitations to our review, including publication bias and selection bias. Our review included only a few studies involving relatively few participants.

CONCLUSIONS

The available evidence suggests that early ultrafiltration is safe and effective for patients with hypervolemic acute heart failure. It allows greater fluid removal and weight loss by 48 h than do intravenous diuretics, with no significant increase in adverse effects.

Ultrafiltration in the management of acute decompensated heart failure

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Admissions to hospital for acute decompensated heart failure continue to increase and represent a significant burden on both patients' and healthcare resources. The majority of these admissions are for the control of volume overload; however, standard treatment with intravenous diuretics is not always effective and can lead to increased renal morbidity. One alternative to standard therapy is mechanical fluid removal with ultrafiltration, this review will highlight the current evidence and efficacy regarding ultrafiltration use in acute heart failure.

RECENT FINDINGS

Multiple recent clinical trials have demonstrated the safety and feasibility of ultrafiltration in the management of acute heart failure. Ultrafiltration may be more effective at removing fluid than standard diuretic therapy and has been associated with beneficial long-term results. However, it remains to be determined whether ultrafiltration is truly nephroprotective and when and how this therapy is best utilized.

SUMMARY

Ultrafiltration is an attractive alternative to standard diuretic therapy in the management of volume overload from acute heart failure. Further research is needed to confirm the cost-effectiveness and to determine long-term impacts on morbidity and mortality.

Heart failure treatment in the intensive care unit in children

Although pediatric heart failure is generally a chronic, progressive disorder, recovery of ventricular function may occur with some forms of cardiomyopathy. Guidelines for the management of chronic heart failure in adults and children have recently been published by the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation the American College of Cardiology, and the American Heart Association. The primary aim of heart failure therapy is to reduce symptoms, preserve long-term ventricular performance, and prolong survival primarily through antagonism of the neurohormonal compensatory mechanisms. Because some medications may be detrimental during an acute decompensation, physicians who manage these patients as inpatients must be knowledgeable about the medications and therapeutic goals of chronic heart failure treatment. Understanding the mechanisms of chronic heart failure may foster improved understanding of the treatment of decompensated heart failure.

Fluid retention is associated with cardiovascular mortality in patients undergoing long-term hemodialysis

BACKGROUND

Patients with chronic kidney disease (stage 5) who undergo hemodialysis treatment have similarities to heart failure patients in that both populations retain fluid frequently and have excessively high mortality. Volume overload in heart failure is associated with worse outcomes. We hypothesized that in hemodialysis patients, greater interdialytic fluid gain is associated with poor all-cause and cardiovascular survival.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We examined 2-year (July 2001 to June 2003) mortality in 34,107 hemodialysis patients across the United States who had an average weight gain of at least 0.5 kg above their end-dialysis dry weight by the time the subsequent hemodialysis treatment started. The 3-month averaged interdialytic weight gain was divided into 8 categories of 0.5-kg increments (up to > or =4.0 kg). Eighty-six percent of patients gained >1.5 kg between 2 dialysis sessions. In unadjusted analyses, higher weight gain was associated with better nutritional status (higher protein intake, serum albumin, and body mass index) and tended to be linked to greater survival. However, after multivariate adjustment for demographics (case mix) and surrogates of malnutrition-inflammation complex, higher weight-gain increments were associated with increased risk of all-cause and cardiovascular death. The hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) of cardiovascular death for weight gain <1.0 kg and > or =4.0 kg (compared with 1.5 to 2.0 kg as the reference) were 0.67 (0.58 to 0.76) and 1.25 (1.12 to 1.39), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In hemodialysis patients, greater fluid retention between 2 subsequent hemodialysis treatment sessions is associated with higher risk of all-cause and cardiovascular death. The mechanisms by which fluid retention influences cardiovascular survival in hemodialysis may be similar to those in patients with heart failure and warrant further research.

Current treatment options for early management in acute decompensated heart failure

Acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) is a common syndrome that precedes over 100,000 hospitalizations in Canada per year (with length of stay in excess of six to eight days), making this the most costly disorder for patients older than 65 years of age. Over 85% of ADHF patients present with shortness of breath and exhibit evidence of volume overload. These findings may be variable in elderly patients, which complicates diagnosis. In fact, even in experienced centres, diagnostic accuracy is less than 80%. Despite advances in the treatment of chronic heart failure, meaningful improvements in outcomes associated with ADHF are very few. The basic assessment and treatments have not changed (early parenteral diuretics, electrocardiographic and oxygen saturation monitoring, supplemental oxygen administration). The introduction of measurement of natriuretic peptides in those in whom the diagnosis is uncertain may reduced the error rate by over 50%. The use of vasodilator therapy in the absence of cardiogenic shock can lead to earlier amelioration of symptoms, especially in those who do not respond to initial diuretics. Repeated monitoring of vital signs, body weight, electrolytes and creatinine levels is essential to minimize the risk of side effects of treatments. Noninvasive ventilation may reduce the need for endotracheal intubation in patients with severe ADHF and hypoxia at rest. Once the initial phase of heart failure treatment is completed, then the clinician should begin to focus on maximization of chronic heart failure therapy and discharge planning.

Bridging the gap between evidence and practice in acute decompensated heart failure management

Registry data indicate a gap between evidence-based guidelines and current management of patients with acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF). Bridging this gap is crucial given the frequency and cost of hospitalization for this disorder. Patients with ADHF require rapid assessment to determine appropriate treatment location and initial therapy. Patients with impending respiratory failure or cardiogenic shock should be managed in an intensive care setting, patients with congestion that is expected to require prolonged intravenous therapy should be admitted to the hospital, and patients with congestion that is likely to respond within 12-24 hours can be managed in an observation unit. Clinical status should guide selection of initial therapy. Initially, therapeutic response should be assessed every couple of hours. Once effective acute therapy has been established, it is important to implement strategies to improve long-term outcomes. These strategies include ensuring that care complies with established core performance measures, providing patient education in a manner suited to ensure comprehension and retention, and arranging for appropriate outpatient follow-up, ideally in a comprehensive heart failure disease management program. The purpose of this review is (1) to examine evidence-based guidelines for the treatment of ADHF, (2) to present a practical algorithm for patient assessment and treatment derived from these guidelines and personal experience, and (3) to discuss systems to enhance the ultimate transition of patient care from the inpatient to outpatient setting.

Practical applications of intravenous diuretic therapy in decompensated heart failure

Intravenous (IV) loop diuretics play an important role in the treatment of decompensated heart failure (DHF). They inhibit the Na(+)-K(+)-2Cl(-) reabsorptive pump in the thick ascending limb of the loop of Henle, and the resultant natriuresis and diuresis decreases volume load, improves hemodynamics, and reduces DHF symptoms. However, loop diuretics have a short half-life and their efficacy may be limited by postdiuretic sodium rebound during the period between doses in which the tubular diuretic concentration is subtherapeutic. Moreover, they can produce electrolyte abnormalities, neurohormonal activation, intravascular volume depletion, and renal dysfunction. Several studies have reported an association between diuretic therapy and increased morbidity and mortality. In addition, many patients, especially those with more advanced forms of heart failure (HF), are resistant to standard doses of loop diuretics. These high-risk, resistant patients may benefit from pharmacologic and/or nonpharmacologic interventions to improve hemodynamic performance, treatment of renovascular disease, discontinuation of aspirin and other sodium-retaining drugs, manipulation of the route of delivery or combination of diuretic classes, or hemofiltration. Despite >50 years of use, many questions regarding the use of intravenous diuretic agents in patients with DHF are still unanswered, and there remains a compelling need for well-designed randomized, controlled clinical trials to establish appropriate treatment regimens that maximize therapeutic benefit while minimizing morbidity and mortality.

Beyond diuretics: management of volume overload in acute heart failure syndromes

Diuretics are an established foundation of therapy for patients with chronic heart failure (HF) as well as for those hospitalized for treatment of acute HF syndromes. Despite the accepted use of diuretics in acute HF syndromes, treatment patterns with diuretics vary widely, and there are no data from randomized studies on the benefit of diuretics on morbidity or mortality in patients hospitalized with acute HF syndromes. Additional pharmacologic therapies that complement or replace diuretics in this setting, especially in patients with diuretic resistance, include positive inotropes, nitrovasodilators, and natriuretic peptides, but data are likewise lacking on important clinical outcomes. Ultrafiltration has also been used as a nonpharmacologic strategy to treat patients with acute HF syndromes who exhibit resistance to diuretics. Effective monitoring of volume status with newer modalities may allow more selective use of diuretics and diuretic-like modalities, but additional randomized trial data are clearly needed to establish ideal strategies to promote volume removal in acute HF syndromes.

Optimizing treatment and outcomes in acute heart failure: beyond initial triage

Heart failure contributes substantially to health care costs in the United States due to its prevalence and frequent necessity for repeat hospitalizations to manage episodes of acute decompensation. Heart failure overwhelmingly impacts Medicare costs, as the highest proportion of heart failure patients are older than 65 years of age. Efforts to reduce morbidity, mortality, and health care resource utilization have been achieved successfully through emergency department-based heart failure observation units. For select patients, the observation unit can provide care with effective oral agents, including angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, beta-adrenergic receptor blockers, and diuretics, as well as administration of other vasoactive agents, followed by a discharge plan of effective heart failure education and rigorous follow-up management. As advanced pharmacologic and diagnostic therapies continue to emerge, the observation unit staff can play an integral role in the critical education and self-management tools that are needed by the patient to ultimately improve outcomes and quality of life.