Triamterene 50mg / Furosemide 40mg tablets

Most episodes of acute heart failure (AHF) are characterized by increasing signs and symptoms of congestion, manifested by edema, pleura effusion and/or ascites. Immediately and repeatedly administered intravenous (IV) loop diuretics currently represent the mainstay of initial therapy aiming to achieve adequate diuresis/natriuresis and euvolemia. Despite these efforts, a significant proportion of patients have residual congestion at discharge, which is associated with a poor prognosis. Therefore, a standardized approach is needed. The door to diuretic time should not exceed 60 min. As a general rule, the starting IV dose is 20-40 mg furosemide equivalents in loop diuretic naïve patients or double the preexisting oral home dose to be administered via IV. Monitoring responses within the following first hours are key issues. (1) After 2 h, spot urinary sodium should be ≥50-70 mmol/L. (2) After 6 h, the urine output should be ≥100-150 mL/hour. If these target measures are not reached, the guidelines currently recommend a doubling of the original dose to a maximum of 400-600 mg furosemide per day and in patients with severely impaired kidney function up to 1000 mg per day. Continuous infusion of loop diuretics offers no benefit over intermittent boluses (DOSE trial). Emerging evidence by recent randomized trials (ADVOR, CLOROTIC) supports the concept of an early combination diuretic therapy, by adding either acetazolamide (500 mg IV once daily) or hydrochlorothiazide. Acetazolamide is particularly useful in the presence of a baseline bicarbonate level of ≥27 mmol/L and remains effective in the presence of preexisting/worsening renal dysfunction but should be used only in the first three days to prevent severe metabolic disturbances. Patients should not leave the hospital when they are still congested and/or before optimized long-term guideline-directed medical therapy has been initiated. Special attention should be paid to AHF patients during the vulnerable post-discharge period, with an early follow-up visit focusing on up-titrate treatments of recommended doses within 2 weeks (STRONG-HF).

Abstract licence: CC BY

Background: Data on diuretic treatment in nephrotic syndrome (NS) are scarce. Our goal was to assess the non-inferiority of the combined oral diuretics (furosemide/hydrochlorothiazide/amiloride) compared to intravenous (i.v.) furosemide in patients with NS and resistant edema. Methods: We conducted a prospective randomized trial on 22 patients with resistant nephrotic edema (RNE), defined as hypervolemia and a FENa < 0.2%. Based on a computer-generated 1:1 randomization, we assigned patients to receive either intravenous furosemide (40 mg bolus and then continuous administration of 5 mg/h) or oral furosemide (40 mg/day) and hydrochlorothiazide/amiloride (50/5 mg/day) for a period of 5 days. Clinical and laboratory measurements were performed daily. Hydration status was assessed by bioimpedance on day 1 and at the end of day 5 after treatment initiation. The primary endpoint was weight change from baseline to day 5. Secondary endpoints were hydration status change measured by bioimpedance and safety outcomes (low blood pressure, severe electrolyte disturbances, acute kidney injury and worsening hypervolemia). Results: Primary endpoint analysis showed that after 5 days of treatment, there was a significant difference in weight change from baseline between groups [adjusted mean difference: −3.33 kg (95% CI: −6.34 to −0.31), p = 0.03], with a higher mean weight change in the oral diuretic treatment group [−7.10 kg (95% CI: −18.30 to −4.30) vs. −4.55 kg (95%CI: −6.73 to −2.36)]. Secondary endpoint analysis showed that there was no significant difference between groups regarding hydration status change [adjusted mean difference: −0.05 L (95% CI: −2.6 to 2.6), p = 0.96], with a mean hydration status change in the oral diuretic treatment group of −4.71 L (95% CI: −6.87 to −2.54) and −3.91 L (95% CI: −5.69 to −2.13) in the i.v. diuretic treatment group. We observed a significant decrease in adjusted mean serum sodium of −2.15 mmol/L [(95% CI: −4.25 to −0.05), p = 0.04]), favored by the combined oral diuretic treatment [−2.70 mmol/L (95% CI: −4.89 to −0.50) vs. −0.10 mmol/L (95%CI: −1.30 to 1.10)]. No statistically significant difference was observed between the two groups in terms of adverse events. Conclusions: A combination of oral diuretics based on furosemide, amiloride and hydrochlorothiazide is non-inferior to i.v. furosemide in weight control of patients with RNE and a similar safety profile.

Abstract licence: CC BY

Abstract The effect of diuretics can be limited by stimulation of counter-regulatory mechanisms, eventually leading to diuretic resistance. It is thought that the mineralocorticoid aldosterone might contribute to the development of diuretic resistance. To test this, we challenged genetically modified mice with or without a deletion of the gene coding for the aldosterone synthase (AS) with furosemide, hydrochlorothiazide (HCT) and triamterene. Urinary excretion was studied in metabolic cages; kidneys were studied for expression of sodium transporters. In both genotypes, a 4-day treatment with HCT via drinking water (400 mg/l) induced a similar natriuresis and modest loss of body weight < 10%. In contrast, furosemide (125 mg/l) and triamterene (200 mg/l) via drinking water stimulated a significantly higher natriuresis and body weight loss in AS −/− mice and in addition, triamterene caused massive hyperkalemia > 9 mM and acidosis (pH < 7.0). In AS + / + mice, plasma aldosterone concentration tended to increase under furosemide and HCT administration, while triamterene induced a robust ~ sixfold increase. In the kidney, apical targeting and proteolytic activation of the epithelial sodium channel ENaC were stimulated in AS + / + mice under triamterene treatment, an effect that was diminished in AS − / − mice. In conclusion, aldosterone is essentially involved in the development of diuretic resistance to ENaC blockade by triamterene and to a lesser extent to furosemide. In contrast, resistance to HCT was independent of aldosterone.

Abstract licence: CC BY

Cognitive decline is a common occurrence in elderly individuals, leading to social issues, health concerns, and placing pressure on the healthcare system. Several factors can affect cognitive function, and medication is one of the most important factors for the elderly. Thus, understanding the impact of medications on cognitive decline in the elderly is crucial. This study aimed to investigate the association between commonly used drugs in the United States and cognitive function. The study utilized bivariate analysis and multiple regression analysis on cognitive function data, prescription medication data, and other covariates data from 2 cycles of the US National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, conducted between 2011 and 2014. The study included 82 drugs after excluding missing data and selection criteria. The majority of these drugs were associated with lower cognitive scores compared to those who did not use prescription medications. Estradiol, naproxen, bupropion, and the combined use of triamterene and hydrochlorothiazide were found to enhance performance on 2 memory cognitive tests, immediate recall and delayed recall, but not on the processing cognitive tests, animal fluency, and digit symbol substitution test. The findings of this study provide a foundation for the selection of drugs with potential cognitive benefits for further investigation and expand knowledge on the cognitive implications of prescription medications, highlighting the possible advantages of certain drugs and the need for caution when using others.

Abstract licence: CC BY-NC