201. Impact of renal dysfunction on the management and outcome of acute heart failure: results from the French prospective, multicentre, DeFSSICA survey.
- Author
-
Dos Reis D, Fraticelli L, Bassand A, Manzo-Silberman S, Peschanski N, Charpentier S, Elbaz M, Savary D, Bonnefoy-Cudraz E, Laribi S, Henry P, Guerraoui A, Tazarourte K, Chouihed T, and El Khoury C
- Subjects
- Acute Disease, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Cardio-Renal Syndrome mortality, Cardio-Renal Syndrome physiopathology, Comorbidity, Defibrillators, Disease Management, Diuretics adverse effects, Female, France epidemiology, Furosemide adverse effects, Glomerular Filtration Rate, Heart Failure mortality, Heart Failure physiopathology, Hospital Mortality, Hospitalization, Humans, Kidney physiopathology, Male, Prospective Studies, Cardio-Renal Syndrome therapy, Diuretics administration & dosage, Furosemide administration & dosage, Heart Failure therapy, Kidney drug effects
- Abstract
Objectives: Cardiorenal syndrome (CRS) is the combination of acute heart failure syndrome (AHF) and renal dysfunction (creatinine clearance (CrCl) ≤60 mL/min). Real-life data were used to compare the management and outcome of AHF with and without renal dysfunction., Design: Prospective, multicentre., Setting: Twenty-six academic, community and regional hospitals in France., Participants: 507 patients with AHF were assessed in two groups according to renal function: group 1 (patients with CRS (CrCl ≤60 mL/min): n=335) and group 2 (patients with AHF with normal renal function (CrCl >60 mL/min): n=172)., Results: Differences were observed (group 1 vs group 2) at admission for the incidence of chronic heart failure (56.42% vs 47.67%), use of furosemide (60.9% vs 52.91%), insulin (15.52% vs 9.3%) and amiodarone (14.33% vs 4.65%); additionally, more patients in group 1 carried a defibrillator (4.78% vs 0%), had ≥2 hospitalisations in the last year (15.52% vs 5.81%) and were under the care of a cardiologist (72.24% vs 61.63%). Clinical signs were broadly similar in each group. Brain-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) and BNP prohormone were higher in group 1 than group 2 (1157.5 vs 534 ng/L and 5120 vs 2513 ng/mL), and more patients in group 1 were positive for troponin (58.2% vs 44.19%), had cardiomegaly (51.04% vs 37.21%) and interstitial opacities (60.3% vs 47.67%). The only difference in emergency treatment was the use of nitrates, (higher in group 1 (21.9% vs 12.21%)). In-hospital mortality and the percentage of patients still hospitalised after 30 days were similar between groups, but the median stay was longer in group 1 (8 days vs 6 days)., Conclusions: Renal impairment in AHF should not limit the use of loop diuretics and/or vasodilators, but early assessment of pulmonary congestion and close monitoring of the efficacy of conventional therapies is encouraged to allow rapid and appropriate implementation of alternative therapies if necessary., Competing Interests: Competing interests: CEK has received grants from Novartis (other than this work), Daiichy Sankyo and Boehringer Ingleheim. NP report has acted as a paid consultant for Vygon SA. SC reports personal fees from Novartis (other than this work). LF is an employee of RESCUe Network., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)
- Published
- 2019
- Full Text
- View/download PDF