Torasemide 2.5mg tablets

BackgroundHealthcare providers should balance the potential risks and benefits of chronic diuretic use, particularly in older adults, as with age, diuretic benefits may decline and risks increase. A comprehensive synthesis and critical evaluation of the available evidence on chronic diuretic treatment effects is currently lacking.MethodsWe conducted an umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses published since 2018 on health outcomes associated with diuretic use in randomized-controlled trials (RCTs). We conducted random-effects meta-analysis for pooled effect estimates and narratively summarized data that could not be pooled.ResultsWe included 741 effect estimations from 117 systematic reviews (SRs) on 1566 RCTs in individuals aged 62 ± 6 years. Of our 33 meta-analyses, 11 provided convincing, high-quality evidence: finerenone reduced the risk of cardiovascular (CV) mortality and end-stage kidney disease in individuals with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and/or type 2 diabetes (T2D). Torasemide reduced the risk of heart failure-related hospitalization (HFH) more than furosemide in individuals with HF. Thiazides reduced CV events in individuals with hypertension. Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) reduced HFH, but also increased hyperkalemia risk in individuals with HF. MRAs also reduced the risk of atrial fibrillation in those with HF or CVD, and reduced HFH, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), > 40% eGFR decrease, and composite kidney outcomes in individuals with CKD and/or T2D. Lower quality evidence suggests that in older (≥ 65 years), but not in younger adults, diuretics may reduce CV mortality, but also increase adverse event (AE) risk.ConclusionsOur umbrella review offers a comprehensive and up-to-date evaluation of the benefits and harms of diuretics. However, further research is needed to establish their efficacy and safety in populations commonly seen in clinical practice, especially older adults living with multimorbidity and frailty.

Abstract licence: CC BY

PICO question In dogs with congestive heart failure, does the use of torasemide as a first line diuretic result in a superior survival time when compared to furosemide?   Clinical bottom line Category of research question Treatment The number and type of study designs reviewed Five studies were critically appraised, they were all prospective randomised controlled trials Strength of evidence Moderate Outcomes reported There is currently a lack of studies looking at comparing furosemide directly with torasemide in patients with congestive heart failure. There are many similarly drawn conclusions from the studies: torasemide is not inferior to furosemide in the treatment of CHF, torasemide is comparable to furosemide at one tenth the dose (or less) and that torasemide may be more effective at diuresis than furosemide with a prolonged duration of action Conclusion There is currently no clear and obvious benefit for the use of torasemide, over furosemide, as a first line diuretic for dogs with congestive heart failure   How to apply this evidence in practice The application of evidence into practice should take into account multiple factors, not limited to: individual clinical expertise, patient’s circumstances and owners’ values, country, location or clinic where you work, the individual case in front of you, the availability of therapies and resources. Knowledge Summaries are a resource to help reinforce or inform decision-making. They do not override the responsibility or judgement of the practitioner to do what is best for the animal in their care.

Abstract licence: CC BY 4.0