Risk of hyponatremia with diuretics: chlorthalidone versus hydrochlorothiazide

Hypertension: sex-related differences in drug treatment, prevalence and blood pressure control in primary care

Antihypertensive treatment is equally beneficial for reducing cardiovascular risk in both men and women. Despite this, the drug treatment, prevalence and control of hypertension differ between men and women. Men and women respond differently, particularly with respect to the risk of adverse events, to many antihypertensive drugs. Certain antihypertensive drugs may also be especially beneficial in the setting of certain comorbidities - of both cardiovascular and extracardiac nature - which also differ between men and women. Furthermore, hypertension in pregnancy can pose a considerable therapeutic challenge for women and their physicians in primary care. In addition, data from population-based studies and from real-world data are inconsistent regarding whether men or women attain hypertension-related goals to a higher degree. In population-based studies, women with hypertension have higher rates of treatment and controlled blood pressure than men, whereas real-world, primary-care data instead show better blood pressure control in men. Men and women are also treated with different antihypertensive drugs: women use more thiazide diuretics and men use more angiotensin-enzyme inhibitors and calcium-channel blockers. This narrative review explores these sex-related differences with guidance from current literature. It also features original data from a large, Swedish primary-care register, which showed that blood pressure control was better in women than men until they reached their late sixties, after which the situation was reversed. This age-related decrease in blood pressure control in women was not, however, accompanied by a proportional increase in use of antihypertensive drugs and female sex was a significant predictor of less intensive antihypertensive treatment.

Blood Pressure Control in Elderly Chronic Kidney Disease Patients

In elderly chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients, isolated systolic hypertension is common, the rate of renal function decline is slow, and there is a high possibility of physical damage due to side effects such as drug use-related orthostatic hypotension. Therefore, there are still many questions about whether lowering blood pressure in elderly patients will actually improve prognosis. Since many blood pressure-related clinical studies exclude advanced CKD and the elderly, it is particularly difficult to define target blood pressure in these populations. A randomized controlled trial is needed to establish optimal blood pressure targets and treatment strategies in elderly patients with CKD. This review seeks to summarize the guidelines available at this time.

Nalfurafine, a G-Protein-Biased KOR (Kappa Opioid Receptor) Agonist, Enhances the Diuretic Response and Limits Electrolyte Losses to Standard-of-Care Diuretics

Nalfurafine is a G-protein-biased KOR (kappa opioid receptor) agonist that produces analgesia and lacks central nervous system adverse effects. Here, we examined the cardiovascular and renal responses to intravenous and oral nalfurafine alone and in combination with furosemide, hydrochlorothiazide, or amiloride. We hypothesized that nalfurafine, given its distinct mechanism of vasopressin inhibition, would increase urine output to these diuretics and limit electrolyte loss. Following catheterization, conscious Sprague-Dawley rats received an isotonic saline infusion and were then administered an intravenous bolus of nalfurafine, a diuretic, or a combination. Mean arterial pressure, heart rate, and urine output were recorded for 90 minutes. In another study, rats were placed in metabolic cages and administered drug in an oral volume load. Hourly urine samples were then collected for 5 hours. Intravenous and oral nalfurafine produced a marked diuresis, antinatriuresis, antikaliuresis, and a decrease in mean arterial pressure. Compared with diuretic treatment alone, intravenous coadministration with nalfurafine significantly increased urine output to furosemide and hydrochlorothiazide and decreased sodium and potassium excretion. Notably, mean arterial pressure was reduced with nalfurafine/diuretic combination therapy compared to diuretics alone. Similarly, oral coadministration of nalfurafine significantly increased urine output to hydrochlorothiazide and decreased sodium and potassium excretion, whereas combination with furosemide only limited the amount of sodium excreted. Further, both intravenous and oral coadministration of nalfurafine enhanced the diuresis to amiloride and decreased sodium excretion. Together, these findings demonstrate that nalfurafine enhances the diuresis to standard-of-care diuretics without causing an excessive loss of electrolytes, offering a new approach to treat several cardiovascular conditions.

Chlorthalidone versus hydrochlorothiazide: major cardiovascular events, blood pressure, left ventricular mass, and adverse effects

BACKGROUND

There is continuous debate whether chlorthalidone (CTD) and hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) differ in reducing major cardiovascular events (MACE). HCTZ is prescribed 10 times more commonly than CTD.

METHOD

A systematic literature search yielded 14 references, including two network meta-analyses of randomized trials with MACE and left ventricular mass as outcomes.

RESULTS

The network meta-analysis of randomized trials showed CTD reducing MACE more than HCTZ, hazard ratio = 0.79 (0.72-0.88), P < 0.0001, and an observational cohort study gave an identical point estimate: hazard ratio = 0.79 (0.68-0.92), P = 0.002. In contrast, two observational cohort studies reported no differences between CTD and HCTZ. However, in the studies showing the superiority of CTD median follow-up was 4.3 and 7.0 years, respectively, whereas in the latter studies showing no difference between the two drugs follow-up was only 0.95 and 0.25 years. As differences in outcomes for MACE in hypertension trials with various interventions only emerge after prolonged (>1 year) therapy, differences in follow-up explain these discrepant results. CTD also more effectively reduced left ventricular mass in observational data and network analysis of trials. These advantages of CTD over HCTZ are consistent with greater reductions in night-time blood pressure, greater reductions in oxidative stress and platelet aggregation, and greater improvements in endothelial function.

CONCLUSION

Over the short-term there were no differences in the net clinical benefit between HCTZ and CTD. However, long-term available data document CTD to be significantly more effective in reducing MACE than HCTZ. The Veterans Administration's trial in progress may provide definitive answer to these questions.

Network meta-analysis of efficacy and safety of chlorthalidone and hydrochlorothiazide in hypertensive patients

Hypertension is a chronic condition leading to increased stress on the heart and blood vessels, a critical risk factor for clinically significant events such as myocardial infarction heart failure, stroke and death. Chlorthalidone and hydrochlorothiazide are first-line antihypertensive agents for most patients with hypertension. The aim of our meta-analysis was to compare the efficacy and safety of both therapies in patients with hypertension. Searches of electronic databases PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, PsycInfo and eLIBRARY.ru, were performed. We used network meta-analysis to combine direct and indirect evidence. Forest plots and closed loops depict estimated results from studies included in our meta-analysis. Of 1289 identified sources, only 37 were included in our meta-analysis. Our analysis has demonstrated a slight superiority for chlorthalidone regarding SBP and not statistically significant differences regarding DBP. Simultaneously, hydrochlorothiazide seems to be a safer choice of therapy, as evidenced by the levels of serum potassium. The two diuretics can be used interchangeably.

Hypertension Drug Therapy

Hypertension is still the number one global killer. No matter what causes are, lowering blood pressure can significantly reduce cardiovascular complications, cardiovascular death, and total death. Unfortunately, some hypertensive individuals simply do not know having hypertension. Some knew it but either not being treated or treated but blood pressure does not achieve goal. The reasons for inadequate control of blood pressure are many. One important reason is that we are not very familiar with antihypertensive agents and less attention has been paid to comorbidities, complications as well as the hypertension-modified target organ damage in patients with hypertension. The right antihypertensive drug was not given to the right hypertensive patients at right time. This reviewer studied comprehensively the literature, hopefully that the review will help improve antihypertensive drug selection and antihypertensive therapy.

A review of the prescribing trend of thiazide-type and thiazide-like diuretics in hypertension: A UK perspective

Thiazide diuretics have been the cornerstone of hypertension treatment for >5 decades. Most recent European and American guidelines recommend both thiazide-type and thiazide-like diuretics as first-line drugs for all patients with hypertension. In contrast, diuretics are not regarded as first-line treatment in the UK and in patients who are to be initiated on a diuretic treatment, thiazide-like molecules, such as chlortalidone and indapamide are the preferred option. This review examines the prescribing trend of the 4 most commonly prescribed thiazide diuretics for the treatment of hypertension in the UK. Prescription cost analysis data were obtained for both 2010 and 2016/2017 for each region of the UK to analyse the impact of the 2011 National Institute for Health and Care Excellence hypertension guidelines on the trend in thiazide diuretic prescribing. Overall, the prescriptions of thiazide diuretics declined over the years. Bendroflumethiazide is the most commonly prescribed diuretic in the UK and despite some geographical differences, thiazide-type diuretics are more widely used than thiazide-like. The use of indapamide increased significantly between 2010 and 2016/2017 while chlortalidone was rarely employed. Of the many factors affecting trends in prescriptions, clinical inertia, treatment adherence, availability of the products and the lack of fixed dose combinations may play a role.

Impact of Vaptans on Clinical Outcomes in Cirrhosis Patients: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background: Vaptans have been confirmed to mobilize ascites and improve hyponatremia in cirrhosis patients. However, the effects of vaptans on all-cause mortality, ascites-related complications, and adverse events in cirrhosis patients have not been fully determined.

Objectives: To systematically evaluate the impact of vaptans on the clinical outcomes in patients with cirrhosis.

Materials and Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed. The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane’s Library electronic databases were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the clinical efficacy of vaptans in cirrhosis patients. The results were pooled with a random-effect model.

Results: Eighteen RCTs containing 3,059 cirrhosis patients with ascites and/or hyponatremia were included. Meta-analysis showed that vaptans did not significantly affect the risk of all-cause mortality (RR: 1.02, 95% CI: 0.87 to 1.08, p = 0.83; I² = 2%), consistent with studies with short-term (< 26 weeks) and long-term (≥ 26 weeks) follow-up durations. Additionally, vaptans did not affect the incidence of variceal bleeding (RR: 0.96, p = 0.86), showed a trend of reduced incidence of hepatic encephalopathy (RR: 0.86, p = 0.09), significantly reduced the incidence of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (RR: 0.75, p = 0.03), but did not significantly affect the risk of hepatorenal syndrome or renal failure (RR: 1.09, p = 0.36). Vaptans did not affect the incidence of adverse events in cirrhosis patients.

Discussion: Treatment with vaptans is not associated with improved survival in cirrhosis patients, although it may reduce the risk of hepatic encephalopathy and spontaneous bacterial peritonitis in these patients. The limitations of the current study include limited number of available studies, small sample sizes of the included studies, variations of baseline patient characteristics, and differences in the dose and duration of vaptans.

Comparative efficacy and safety of chlorthalidone and hydrochlorothiazide-meta-analysis

Hypertension is a complex syndrome of multiple hemodynamic, neuroendocrine, and metabolic abnormalities. The goals of treatment in hypertension are to optimally control high blood pressure and to reduce associated cardiovascular morbidity and mortality using the most suitable therapy available. Hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) and chlorthalidone (CTLD) are with proven hypertensive effects. The topic of our meta-analysis is to compare the efficacy of HCTZ and CTLD therapy in patient with hypertension. A search of electronic databases PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, PsyInfo, eLIBRARY.ru was performed. We chose the random-effects method for the analysis and depicted the results as forest plots. Sensitivity analyses were performed in order to evaluate the degree of significance of each study. Of the 1289 identified sources, only nine trials directly compared HCTZ and CTLD and were included in the meta-analysis. Changes in SBP lead to WMD (95% CI) equal to -3.26 mmHg showing a slight but statistically significant prevalence of CTLD. Results from analyzed studies referring to DBP lead to WMD (95% CI) equal to -2.41 mmHg, which is also statistically significant. During our analysis, we found that there were not enough studies presenting enough data on the effect of CTLD and HCTZ on levels of serum potassium and serum sodium. Our meta-analysis has demonstrated a slight superiority for CTLD regarding blood pressure control. At the same time, the two medications do not show significant differences in their safety profile.

Hydrochlorothiazide and alternative diuretics versus renin-angiotensin system inhibitors for the regression of left ventricular hypertrophy: a head-to-head meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Found in 36-41% of hypertension, elevated left ventricular mass (LVM) independently predicts cardiovascular events and total mortality. Conversely, drug-induced regression of LVM predicts improved outcomes. Previous studies have favored renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (RASIs) over other antihypertensives for reducing LVM but ignored differences among thiazide-type diuretics. From evidence regarding potency, cardiovascular events, and electrolytes, we hypothesized a priori that 'CHIP' diuretics [CHlorthalidone, Indapamide and Potassium-sparing Diuretic/hydrochlorothiazide (PSD/HCTZ)] would rival RASIs for reducing LVM.

METHOD AND RESULTS

Systematic review yielded 12 relevant double-blind randomized trials. CHIPs were more closely associated with reduced LVM than HCTZ (P = 0.004), indicating that RASIs must be compared with each diuretic separately. Publication bias favoring RASIs was corrected by cumulative analysis. For reducing LVM, HCTZ tended to be less effective than RASIs. However, the following surpassed RASIs: chlorthalidone Hedge's G: -0.37 (95% CI -0.72 to -0.02), P = 0.036; indapamide -0.20 (-0.39 to -0.01), P = 0.035; all CHIPs combined (with 61% of patients in one trial) -0.25 (-0.41to -0.09), P = 0.002. Statistical significance (P < 0.05) did not depend on any one trial. CHIPs reduction in LVM was 37% greater than that from RASIs. CHIPs superiority tended to increase with trial duration, from a negligible effect at 0.5 year to a maximal effect at 0.9-1.0 years: -0.26 (-0.43 to -0.09), P = 0.003. Fifty-eight percent of patients had information on echocardiographic components of LVM: relative to RASIs, CHIPs significantly reduced end-diastolic LV internal dimension (EDLVID): -0.18 (-0.36 to -0.00), P = 0.046. Strength of evidence favoring CHIPs over RASIs was at least moderate.

CONCLUSION

In these novel results in patients with hypertension, CHIPs surpassed RASIs for reducing LVM and EDLVID.

Hydrochlorothiazide vs chlorthalidone, indapamide, and potassium-sparing/hydrochlorothiazide diuretics for reducing left ventricular hypertrophy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Left ventricular hypertrophy develops in 36%-41% of hypertensive patients and independently predicts cardiovascular events and total mortality. Moreover, drug-induced reduction in left ventricular mass (LVM) correlates with improved prognosis. The optimal thiazide-type diuretic for reducing LVM is unknown. Evidence regarding potency, cardiovascular events, sodium, and potassium suggested the hypothesis that "CHIP" diuretics (CHlorthalidone, Indapamide, and Potassium-sparing diuretic/hydrochlorothiazide [PSD/HCTZ]) would reduce LVM more than HCTZ. Systematic searches of five databases were conducted. Among the 38 randomized trials, a 1% reduction in systolic blood pressure (SBP) predicted a 1% reduction in LVM, P = 0.00001. CHIP-HCTZ differences in reducing LVM differed across trials (ie, heterogeneity), making interpretation uncertain. However, among the 28 double-blind trials, heterogeneity was undetectable, and HCTZ reduced LVM (percent reduction [95% CI]) by -7.3 (-10.4, -4.2), P < 0.0001. CHIP diuretics surpassed HCTZ in reducing LVM: chlorthalidone -8.2 (-14.7, -1.6), P = 0.015; indapamide -7.5 (-12.7, -2.3), P = 0.005; and all CHIP diuretics combined -7.7 (-12.2, -3.1), P < 0.001. The comparison of PSD/HCTZ with HCTZ had low statistical power but favored PSD/HCTZ: -6.0 (-14.1, +2.1), P = 0.149. Thus, compared to HCTZ, CHIP diuretics had twice the effect on LVM. CHIP diuretics did not surpass HCTZ in reducing systolic or diastolic blood pressure: -0.3 (-5.0, +4.3) and -1.6 (-5.6, +2.4), respectively. The strength of evidence that CHIP diuretics surpass HCTZ for reducing LVM was high (GRADE criteria). In conclusion, these novel results have demonstrated that CHIP diuretics reduce LVM 2-fold more than HCTZ among hypertensive patients. Although generally related to LVM, blood pressure fails to explain the superiority of CHIP diuretics for reducing LVM.

Incidence of hospital-acquired hyponatremia by the dose and type of diuretics among patients with acute heart failure and its association with long-term outcomes

BACKGROUND

Diuretics are the cornerstone therapy for acute heart failure (AHF) but can lead to various electrolyte disturbances and inversely affect the patients' outcome. We aimed to evaluate whether (1) the dose of loop diuretics could predict hospital-acquired hyponatremia (HAH) during AHF treatment, (2) addition of thiazide diuretics could affect development of HAH, and (3) assess their impact on long-term outcomes.

METHODS

We analyzed the subjects enrolled in the multicenter AHF registry (WET-HF). Risk of HAH, defined as hyponatremia at discharge with normonatremia upon admission, was evaluated based on oral non-potassium-sparing diuretics via multivariate logistic regression analysis. Additionally, we performed one-to-one matched analysis based on propensity scores for thiazide diuretics use and compared long-term mortality.

RESULTS

Of total 1163 patients (mean age 72.6±13.6 years, male 62.6%), 92 (7.9%) had HAH. Compared with low-dose loop diuretics users (<40mg; without thiazide diuretics), risks for developing HAH were significantly higher in patients with thiazide diuretics, regardless of the dose of loop diuretics (OR 2.67, 95% CI 1.13-6.34 and OR 2.31, 95% CI 1.50-5.13 for low- and high-dose loop diuretics, respectively). The association was less apparent in patients without thiazide diuretics (OR 1.29, 95% CI 0.73-2.27 for high-dose loop diuretics alone). Among 206 matched patients, all-cause and cardiac mortality rate was 27% and 14% in non thiazide diuretics users and 50% and 30% in thiazide diuretics users, respectively (HR 2.46, 95% CI 1.29-4.69, p=0.006 and HR 2.50, 95% CI 1.10-5.67, p=0.028, respectively) during a mean 19.3 months of follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Thiazide diuretics use, rather than loop diuretics dose, was independently associated with HAH; and mortality was higher in thiazide diuretics users even after statistical matching.

Renal Considerations in the Treatment of Hypertension

There are renal implications when employing intensive blood pressure control strategies. While this approach provides cardiovascular benefit in patients with and without chronic kidney disease, the impact on renal disease progression differs according to the pattern of underlying renal injury. In the setting of proteinuria, stringent blood pressure control has generally conferred a protective effect on renal disease progression, but in the absence of proteinuria, this benefit tends to be much less impressive. Thiazide diuretics are frequently part of the regimen to achieve intensive blood pressure control. These drugs can cause hyponatremia and present with biochemical evidence mimicking the syndrome of inappropriate antidiuretic hormone secretion. Altered prostaglandin transport may explain the unique susceptibility to this complication observed in some patients. Hyperkalemia is also a complication of intensive blood pressure lowering particularly in the setting of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone blockade. There are strategies and new drugs now available that can allow use of these blockers and at the same time ensure a normal plasma potassium concentration.

Comparison of thiazide-like diuretics versus thiazide-type diuretics: a meta-analysis

Thiazide diuretics are widely used for the management of hypertension. In recent years, it has been actively debated that there is interchangeability of thiazide‐type diuretics hydrochlorothiazide and thiazide‐like diuretics including indapamide and chlorthalidone for the treatment of hypertension. With the purpose of seeking out the best thiazide diuretic for clinicians, we summarized the existing evidence on the two types of drugs and conducted a meta‐analysis on their efficacy in lowering blood pressure and effects on blood electrolyte, glucose and total cholesterol. Twelve trials were identified: five based on the comparison of indapamide versus hydrochlorothiazide and seven based on the chlorthalidone versus hydrochlorothiazide. In the meta‐analysis of blood pressure reduction, thiazide‐like diuretics seemed to further reduce systolic BP ([95% CI]; −5.59 [−5.69, −5.49]; P < 0.001) and diastolic BP ([95% CI]; −1.98 [−3.29, −0.66]; P = 0.003). Meanwhile, in the analysis of side effects, the incidence of hypokalemia ([95% CI]; 1.58 [0.80, 3.12]; P = 0.19), hyponatremia ([95% CI]; −0.14 [−0.57, 0.30], P = 0.54), change of blood glucose ([95% CI];0.13 [−0.16, 0.41], P = 0.39) and total cholesterol ([95% CI]; 0.13 [−0.16, 0.41], P = 0.39) showed that there is no statistical significant differences between the two groups of drugs. In conclusion, using thiazide‐like diuretics is superior to thiazide‐type diuretics in reducing blood pressure without increasing the incidence of hypokalemia, hyponatraemia and any change of blood glucose and serum total cholesterol.

Diuretics in the treatment of hypertension

Diuretics have long been used for the treatment of hypertension. Thiazide diuretics are the most commonly prescribed diuretics for hypertension, but other classes of diuretics may be useful in alternative circumstances. Although diuretics are no longer considered the preferred agent for treatment of hypertension in adults and children, they remain acceptable first-line options. Diuretics effectively decrease blood pressure in hypertensive patients, and in adults with hypertension reduce the risk of adverse cardiovascular outcomes. Because of varied pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic differences, chlorthalidone may be the preferred thiazide diuretic in the treatment of primary hypertension. Other types of diuretics (e.g., loop, potassium sparing) may be useful for the treatment of hypertension related to chronic kidney disease (CKD) and other varied conditions. Common side effects of thiazides are mostly dose-related and involve electrolyte and metabolic abnormalities.

Diuretics for Hypertension: A Review and Update

This review and update focuses on the clinical features of hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ), the thiazide-like agents chlorthalidone (CTDN) and indapamide (INDAP), potassium-sparing ENaC inhibitors and aldosterone receptor antagonists, and loop diuretics. Diuretics are the second most commonly prescribed class of antihypertensive medication, and thiazide-related diuretics have increased at a rate greater than that of antihypertensive medications as a whole. The latest hypertension guidelines have underscored the importance of diuretics for all patients, but particularly for those with salt-sensitive and resistant hypertension. HCTZ is 4.2-6.2 systolic mm Hg less potent than CTDN, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, beta blockers, and calcium channel blockers by 24-hour measurements and 5.1mm Hg systolic less potent than INDAP by office measurements. For reducing cardiovascular events (CVEs), HCTZ is less effective than enalapril and amlodipine in randomized trials, and, in network analysis of trials, it is less effective than CTDN and HCTZ-amiloride. Combined with thiazide-type diuretics, potassium-sparing agents decrease ventricular ectopy and reduce the risk for sudden cardiac death relative to thiazide-type diuretics used alone. A recent synthesis of 44 trials has shown that the relative potencies in milligrams among spironolactone (SPIR), amiloride, and eplerenone (EPLER) are approximately from 25 to 10 to 100, respectively, which may be important when SPIR is poorly tolerated. SPIR reduces proteinuria beyond that provided by other renin angiotensin aldosterone inhibitors. EPLER also reduces proteinuria and has beneficial effects on endothelial function. While guidelines often do not differentiate among specific diuretics, this review demonstrates that these distinctions are important for managing hypertension.

Thiazide-associated hyponatremia in the elderly: what the clinician needs to know

Thiazide-induced hyponatremia is one of the main causes of decreased sodium levels in elderly individuals. This review presents the current evidence regarding the thiazide-associated hyponatremia. Thiazide-associated hyponatremia is observed mainly in patients with certain risk factors such as those receiving large doses of thiazides, having much comorbidity, such as heart failure, liver disease or malignancy, and taking several medications, such as non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitors or tricyclic antidepressants. Sodium concentration should be monitored in patients with risk factors for developing thiazide-associated hyponatremia and clinicians should measure promptly serum sodium levels in patients with neurologic signs indicating reduced sodium levels. The clinical and biochemical profile of patients with thiazide-associated hyponatremia may be that of extracellular volume depletion or the syndrome of inappropriate antidiuretic hormone secretion (SIADH). The investigation of possible thiazide-associated hyponatremia includes the exclusion of other causes of decreased sodium levels and the identification of the characteristics of hyponatremia due to thiazides (extracellular volume depletion-related or SIADH-like). Treatment should be carefully monitored to avoid serious neurologic complications due to overcorrection. Clinicians should discourage prescribing thiazides in patients with a history of diuretic-associated hyponatremia and should prefer low doses of thiazides in patients with risk factors for developing thiazide-associated hyponatremia.

Electrolyte and acid-base abnormalities associated with purging behaviors

OBJECTIVE

Eating disorders that are associated with purging behaviors are complicated by frequent blood electrolyte and acid-base abnormalities. Herein, we review the major electrolyte and acid-base abnormalities and their treatment methods. The body of rigorous, eating disorder-specific literature on this topical area is not robust enough to perform a systematic review as defined by PRISMA guidelines. Therefore, a qualitative review of mostly medical literature was conducted.

RESULTS

Hypokalemia, hyponatremia, and sodium chloride-responsive metabolic alkalosis are the most common serum changes that occur as a result of purging behaviors. They vary depending on the mode and frequency of purging behaviors. They can all potentially cause dangerous medical complications and are in need of definitive medical treatment.

DISCUSSION

Eating disorders that are associated with purging behaviors are associated with a number of electrolyte and acid-base changes which are complex in their origin, documented to be medically dangerous and this definitive treatment is necessary to help achieve a successful treatment outcome, and in need of definitive treatment as described herein.

Hydrochlorothiazide is not the most useful nor versatile thiazide diuretic

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To determine usefulness and versatility of hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) relative to other thiazide diuretics in the treatment of hypertension.

RECENT FINDINGS

HCTZ was found to be less potent in lowering blood pressure (BP) than other thiazide diuretics, including chlorthalidone (CTD) and bendroflumethiazide. A recent meta-analysis also suggested HCTZ (12.5-25 mg daily) to be less potent than antihypertensive agents from several other classes, including angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin-receptor blockers, and calcium antagonists. The risk of hyponatremia, hypokalemia, and hyperuricemia associated with HCTZ was lower than with CTD, while the risk of gouty arthritis was similar. Despite lower risks of metabolic side-effects, meta-analysis of clinical trials showed that, for any given difference in achieved clinic SBP, HCTZ therapy was associated with 18% higher adverse cardiovascular events when compared with CTD.

SUMMARY

Increasing evidence suggests inferiority of HCTZ in lowering BP and cardiovascular outcomes in hypertensive patients when compared with other drugs in the same class, particularly CTD and indapamide. Thus, HCTZ is neither more useful nor more versatile than other thiazide diuretics. CTD and indapamide should be preferred over HCTZ in most hypertensive patients when diuretics are required for treatment of hypertension.

Rationale and Design of the "Safety and Efficacy of the Combination of Loop with Thiazide-type Diuretics in Patients with Decompensated Heart Failure (CLOROTIC) Trial:" A Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Study to Determine the Effect of Combined Diuretic Therapy (Loop Diuretics With Thiazide-Type Diuretics) Among Patients With Decompensated Heart Failure

BACKGROUND

Fluid overload refractory to loop diuretic therapy can complicate acute or chronic heart failure (HF) management. The Safety and Efficacy of the Combination of Loop with Thiazide-type Diuretics in Patients with Decompensated Heart Failure (CLOROTIC) trial (Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT01647932) will test the hypothesis that blocking distal tubule sodium reabsorption with hydrochlorothiazide can antagonize the renal adaptation to chronic loop diuretic therapy and improve diuretic resistance.

METHODS

CLOROTIC is a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, multicenter study. Three hundred and four patients with decompensated HF will be randomly assigned to receive hydrochlorothiazide or placebo in addition to a furosemide regimen. The main inclusion criteria are: age ≥18 years, history of chronic HF (irrespective of etiology and/or ejection fraction), admission for acute decompensation, and previous treatment with an oral loop diuretic for at least 1 month before randomization. The 2 coprimary endpoints are changes in body weight and changes in patient-reported dyspnea during hospital admission. Morbidity, mortality, and safety aspects will also be addressed.

CONCLUSIONS

CLOROTIC is the first large-scale trial to evaluate whether the addition of a thiazide diuretic (hydrochlorothiazide) to a loop diuretic (furosemide) is a safe and effective strategy for improving congestive symptoms resulting from HF. This trial will provide important information and will therefore have a major impact on treatment strategies and future trials in these patients.

Drug Interactions in Parkinson's Disease: Safety of Pharmacotherapy for Arterial Hypertension

BACKGROUND

Parkinson's disease (PD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder of the central nervous system, observed in patients aged older than 50 years. In this study, we review interactions between therapies used in PD and selected antihypertensive agents. Moreover, in view of the lack of evidence-based recommendations regarding the pharmacotherapy of arterial hypertension in PD patients, we propose effective and safe therapeutic algorithms for these two coexisting conditions.

METHOD

We used the "Drug interactions" database affiliated with the Ministry of Health, which allows for the identification of interactions between compared active compounds. The database is updated on a monthly basis and all data are consistent with current legislation. For information about interactions, we additionally added data from the British National Formulary, a joint publication of the British Medical Association and the Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain. In this analysis, we also used data from Micromedex^®, Cerner Multum™, Wolters Kluwer™, Lexicomp^® and Stockley's^®. We analysed the potential interactions between antihypertensive and anti-parkinsonian agents included in respective guidelines on the pharmacotherapy of these conditions.

RESULTS

Our analysis revealed the lack of clinically relevant interactions between preparations of levodopa and benserazide (used for the treatment of PD) and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, antagonists of AT₁ receptor for angiotensin II or antagonists of β-adrenoreceptors (β-adrenolytics).

CONCLUSION

To avoid major drug-to-drug interactions, patients receiving preparations of levodopa and benserazide should be prescribed angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, antagonists of AT₁ receptor for angiotensin II, or antagonists of β-adrenoreceptors (β-adrenolytics) as the first-line agents of antihypertensive treatment.

Severe hyponatremia in older patients at admission in an internal medicine department

Hyponatremia is common in older people, most often of multifactorial origin, and can be associated with poor clinical outcomes. The aim was to analyze the frequency of severe hyponatremia (sodium concentration below 125 mmol/L), risk factors and mortality association in hospitalized older patients. A retrospective study was performed in older patients (over 65 years) with hyponatremia, diagnosed at admission in an Internal Medicine Department during one year. A control group of 127 older patients without hyponatremia was considered. Statistical analysis of the data gathered was made with SPSS Statistics 20. The main results were: a group of 1060 patients with age superior to 65 years was identified (representing 72.26% of total admissions); incidence of hyponatremia in those patients was 27.55% and severe hyponatremia was 5.94%; diagnosis of hyponatremia was mentioned in the discharge note in 66.67% of cases; mortality was 27.0%, against 16.0% in the control group (p=0.057, Odds Ratio (OR)=1.940); drugs were a significant risk factor (p<0.001), specially thiazide diuretics (p=0.029, OR=2.774), angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) (p=0.001, OR=4.097), proton-pump inhibitors (PPI) (p=0.007, OR=2.561) and spironolactone (p=0.011, OR=4.473); other relevant risk factors were: increased water intake (p=0.004), tube feeding (p<0.001), vomiting (p=0.032, OR=2.492), cirrhosis (p=0.008, OR=10.862) and hyperhidrosis (p=0.017, OR=2.542). We conclude that, although this group of patients had a high mortality, hyponatremia is often not investigated and not always mentioned as a diagnosis. Clinicians should have a clear appreciation of the roles that iatrogenic interventions and lapses in nutrition frequently play in upsetting the homeostatic balance in older patients.