Ultrafiltration for acute heart failure.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Srivastava M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8781783 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Jan
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Ultrafiltration for acute heart failure.
Srivastava Mehul M Harrison Nicholas N Caetano Ana Francisca Sma AFS Tan Audrey R AR Law Mandy M
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews 20220121
<h4>Background</h4>Pharmacotherapies such as loop diuretics are the cornerstone treatment for acute heart failure (AHF), but resistance and poor response can occur. Ultrafiltration (UF) is an alternative therapy to reduce congestion, however its benefits, efficacy and safety are unclear.<h4>Objectives</h4>To assess the effects of UF compared to diuretic therapy on clinical outcomes such as mortality and rehospitalisation rates.<h4>Search methods</h4>We undertook a systematic search in June 2021 ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundUltrafiltration is an alternative strategy to diuretic therapy for the treatment of patients with acute decompensated heart failure. Little is known about the efficacy and safety of ultrafiltration in patients with acute decompensated heart failure complicated by persistent congestion and worsened renal function.MethodsWe randomly assigned a total of 188 patients with acute decompensated heart failure, worsened renal function, and persistent congestion to a strategy of stepped pharmacologic therapy (94 patients) or ultrafiltration (94 patients). The primary end point was the bivariate change from baseline in the serum creatinine level and body weight, as assessed 96 hours after random assignment. Patients were followed for 60 days.ResultsUltrafiltration was inferior to pharmacologic therapy with respect to the bivariate end point of the change in the serum creatinine level and body weight 96 hours after enrollment (P=0.003), owing primarily to an increase in the creatinine level in the ultrafiltration group. At 96 hours, the mean change in the creatinine level was -0.04±0.53 mg per deciliter (-3.5±46.9 μmol per liter) in the pharmacologic-therapy group, as compared with +0.23±0.70 mg per deciliter (20.3±61.9 μmol per liter) in the ultrafiltration group (P=0.003). There was no significant difference in weight loss 96 hours after enrollment between patients in the pharmacologic-therapy group and those in the ultrafiltration group (a loss of 5.5±5.1 kg [12.1±11.3 lb] and 5.7±3.9 kg [12.6±8.5 lb], respectively; P=0.58). A higher percentage of patients in the ultrafiltration group than in the pharmacologic-therapy group had a serious adverse event (72% vs. 57%, P=0.03).ConclusionsIn a randomized trial involving patients hospitalized for acute decompensated heart failure, worsened renal function, and persistent congestion, the use of a stepped pharmacologic-therapy algorithm was superior to a strategy of ultrafiltration for the preservation of renal function at 96 hours, with a similar amount of weight loss with the two approaches. Ultrafiltration was associated with a higher rate of adverse events. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00608491.).
| S-EPMC3690472 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Studies on the effectiveness of ultrafiltration (UF) in patients hospitalized with acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) have led to heterogeneous study outcomes. This meta-analysis aimed to assess the impact of UF therapy in ADHF patients. We searched the medical literature to identify well-designed studies comparing UF with the usual diuretic therapy in this setting. Systematic evaluation of 8 randomized controlled trials enrolling 801 participants showed greater fluid removal (difference in means 1372.5 mL, 95% CI 849.6 to 1895.4 mL; p < 0.001), weight loss (difference in means 1.592 kg, 95% CI 1.039 to 2.144 kg; p < 0.001) and lower incidences of worsening heart failure (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.94, p = 0.022) and rehospitalization for heart failure (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.82, p = 0.003) without a difference in renal impairment (OR 1.386, 95% CI 0.870 to 2.209; p = 0.169) or all-cause mortality (OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.71, p = 0.546). UF increases fluid removal and weight loss and reduces rehospitalization and the risk of worsening heart failure in congestive patients, suggesting ultrafiltration as a safe and effective treatment option for volume-overloaded heart failure patients.
| S-EPMC8024232 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background Ultrafiltration is not commonly used because of higher incidence of worsening renal function without improved decongestion. We examined differential outcomes of high versus low fluid removal and preserved versus reduced ejection fraction (EF) in CARRESS-HF (Cardiorenal Rescue Study in Acute Decompensated Heart Failure). Methods and Results Baseline characteristics in the ultrafiltration arm were compared according to 24-hour ultrafiltration-based fluid removal above versus below the median. Patients were stratified by EF (≤40% or >40%). We compared clinical parameters of clinical decongestion during the hospitalization based on initial (≤24 hours) response to ultrafiltration. Cox-proportional hazards models were used to identify associations between fluid removal <24 hours and composite of death, hospitalization, or unscheduled outpatient/emergency department visit during study follow-up. The intention-to-treat analysis included 93 patients. Within 24 hours, median fluid removal was 1.89 L (Q1, Q3: 1.22, 3.16). The high fluid removal group had a greater urine output (9.08 versus 6.23 L, P=0.027) after 96 hours. Creatinine change from baseline to 96 hours was similar in both groups (0.10 mg/dL increase, P=0.610). The EF >40% group demonstrated larger increases of change in creatinine (P=0.023) and aldosterone (P=0.038) from baseline to 96 hours. Among patients with EF >40%, those with above median fluid removal (n=17) when compared with below median (n=17) had an increased rate of the combined end point (87.5% versus 47.1%, P=0.014). Conclusions In patients with acute heart failure, higher initial fluid removal with ultrafiltration had no association with worsening renal function. In patients with EF >40%, ultrafiltration was associated with worsening renal function irrespective of fluid removal rate and higher initial fluid removal was associated with higher rates of adverse clinical outcomes, highlighting variable responses to decongestive therapy.
| S-EPMC7955382 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Heart failure remains the leading cause of hospitalization in older patients and is considered a growing public health problem with a significant financial burden on the health care system. The suboptimal efficacy and safety profile of diuretic-based therapeutic regimens coupled with unsatisfactory results of the studies on novel pharmacologic agents have positioned ultrafiltration on the forefront as an appealing therapeutic option for patients with acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF). In recent years, substantial interest in the use of ultrafiltration has been generated due to the advent of dedicated portable devices and promising results of trials focusing both on mechanistic and clinical aspects of this therapeutic modality. This article briefly reviews the proposed benefits of ultrafiltration therapy in the setting of ADHF and summarizes the major findings of the currently available studies in this field. The results of more recent trials on cardiorenal syndrome that present a counterpoint to previous observations and highlight certain limitations of ultrafiltration therapy are then discussed, followed by identification of major challenges and unanswered questions that could potentially hinder its more widespread use. Future studies are warranted to shed light on less well characterized aspects of ultrafiltration therapy and to further define its role in ADHF and cardiorenal syndrome.
| S-EPMC3789341 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Heart failure remains a major public health concern because of its high prevalence, morbidity, mortality, and financial burden. The poor clinical outcomes associated with acute decompensated heart failure, suboptimal efficacy and safety profile of conventional treatment regimens, and unsatisfactory experiences with the newer classes of pharmacologic therapy underlie the interest in the use of extracorporeal isolated ultrafiltration in this setting. In this article, selected mechanistic aspects of ultrafiltration therapy are briefly reviewed followed by a critical overview of the largest trials in this field. I will discuss the clinical relevance of renal dysfunction and decongestion as two commonly used end points of safety and efficacy in the ultrafiltration trials, with emphasis on the emerging pertinent notions that could challenge our conventional thinking. Finally, a number of practical recommendations (e.g., customization of ultrafiltration rates) are provided for ultrafiltration therapy in the setting of acute decompensated heart failure. Because of a paucity of evidence, universally accepted consensus guidelines cannot yet be generated. As such, when considering ultrafiltration therapy for acute decompensated heart failure, the likely benefits should be carefully balanced against the potential risks for an individual patient. A conceivable implication of the ultrafiltration trials is that collaborative heart failure programs benefiting from nephrology expertise and resources could improve the outcomes and reduce the cost.
| S-EPMC4974896 | biostudies-other
Project description:Acute heart failure (AHF) is a life-threatening emergency, which largely profits from early diagnosis and treatment. The prevalence of AHF is difficult to assess, estimates range between 1 and 12% in the general population. Despite recent therapeutic advances, in-hospital mortality is high with estimates varying from 4 and 18% in different registries. Due to large differences in AHF definitions and selection criteria AHF populations vary in their characteristics and outcomes. This is especially true for randomized clinical trials and the external validity of some of these trials is questionable. Additionally, the timing of data collection and/or initiation of new therapies vary with the setting of trials. The aim of this article is to call attention to the difference in AHF populations and to emphasize the need for research to clearly define these populations. AHF populations from registries and clinical trials are the basis for evidence-based management strategies. It is important that these populations represent the patients in whom these strategies will be applied in routine care.
| S-EPMC5074292 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Existing systematic reviews have insufficiently delineated the differing cardiac and renal profile of ultrafiltration compared to diuretics as a method of decongestion in acute decompensated heart failure. This meta-analysis will investigate the impact of ultrafiltration compared to diuretics on prognostic cardiac and renal biomarkers. We searched PubMed Central, Ovid MEDLINE®, Ovid Embase, all EBM reviews, and Web of Science Core Collection for randomised controlled trials published before 21 July 2022. Our main outcome measures were cardiac (brain natriuretic peptide and N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide) and renal biomarkers (serum creatinine, serum sodium, and blood urea nitrogen). A total of 10 randomised trials were included in our analysis after screening. An inverse-variance random effects meta-analysis of the pooled results demonstrated no significant difference between ultrafiltration and diuretics for brain natriuretic peptide, N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide, creatinine, sodium and long-term blood urea nitrogen. However, ultrafiltration produced statistically greater increases in blood urea nitrogen in the short-term (mean difference, 3.88; 95% confidence interval 0.59-7.17 mg/dL). Overall, ultrafiltration produces a similar impact on prognostic cardiac and renal biomarkers when compared to diuretic therapy. We highlight ultrafiltration's significant impact on short-term BUN and recommend further research to investigate more optimal protocols of ultrafiltration administration.
| S-EPMC10141346 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Acute heart failure (AHF) is a life-threatening medical condition, where urgent diagnostic and treatment methods are of key importance. However, there are few evidence-based treatment methods. Interestingly, despite relatively similar ways of management of AHF throughout the globe, mid-term outcome in East Asia, including South Korea is more favorable than in Europe. Yet, most of the treatment methods are symptomatic. The cornerstone of AHF management is identifying precipitating factors and specific phenotype. Multidisciplinary approach is important in AHF, which can be caused or aggravated by both cardiac and non-cardiac causes. The main pathophysiological mechanism in AHF is congestion, both systemic and inside the organs (lung, kidney, or liver). Cardiac output is often preserved in AHF except in a few cases of advanced heart failure. This paper provides guidance on AHF management in a time-based approach. Treatment strategies, criteria for triage, admission to hospital and discharge are described.
| S-EPMC5986746 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe relationship between changes in serum sodium with clinical events in acute heart failure patients using different decongestive events has not been investigated. This study aimed to describe changes in serum sodium levels during decongestion therapy in patients receiving stepped pharmacological therapy versus ultrafiltration.Methods and resultsWe studied 188 patients who were enrolled in the CARRESS-HF trial (Cardiorenal Rescue Study in Acute Decompensated Heart Failure). Treatment-induced hyponatremia was defined as admission normonatremia (≥135 mEq/L) with a subsequent decrease (<135 mEq/L) during hospitalization. Patients treated with ultrafiltration had significantly lower sodium levels than those with conventional treatment at days 1, 4, and 7 (all P<0.01), whereas those at day 30 were similar between the groups. Changes in sodium levels in patients with ultrafiltration were negatively correlated to those in serum creatinine and plasma renin activity. The incidence of treatment-induced hyponatremia was significantly higher in the ultrafiltration group than those receiving conventional treatment (P=0.002). Although patients with discharge hyponatremia had a higher risk for composite end point of all-cause death, rehospitalization, or unscheduled hospital visit in comparison to those without (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.01; 95% confidence interval, 1.09-3.70; P=0.025), the risk was comparable between patients with treatment-induced hyponatremia and those who did not experience any hyponatremia (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.50-1.96; P=0.99).ConclusionsFluid removal by ultrafiltration was associated with a decrease in serum sodium levels compared with diuretic treatment but returned to baseline levels at day 30. Discharge hyponatremia but not treatment-induced hyponatremia was associated with worse clinical outcomes.Clinical trial registrationURL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00608491.
| S-EPMC5308796 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Heart Failure Network - Effectiveness of Ultrafiltration in Treating People With Acute Decompensated Heart Failure and Cardiorenal Syndrome (HFN CARRESS - BioLINCC)
| PRJNA1058791 | ENA