Amiloride versus furosemide for the treatment of edema in patients with nephrotic syndrome: A pilot study (AMILOR)

IF 5.6 2区 医学 Q1 PHYSIOLOGY
Anja Schork, Elisabeth Vogel, Bernhard N. Bohnert, Daniel Essigke, Matthias Wörn, Imma Fischer, Nils Heyne, Andreas L. Birkenfeld, Ferruh Artunc
{"title":"Amiloride versus furosemide for the treatment of edema in patients with nephrotic syndrome: A pilot study (AMILOR)","authors":"Anja Schork,&nbsp;Elisabeth Vogel,&nbsp;Bernhard N. Bohnert,&nbsp;Daniel Essigke,&nbsp;Matthias Wörn,&nbsp;Imma Fischer,&nbsp;Nils Heyne,&nbsp;Andreas L. Birkenfeld,&nbsp;Ferruh Artunc","doi":"10.1111/apha.14183","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Aim</h3>\n \n <p>In rodent models of nephrotic syndrome (NS), edema formation was prevented by blockade of the epithelial sodium channel ENaC with amiloride. However, apart from case reports, there is no evidence favoring ENaC blockade in patients with NS.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>The monocentric randomized controlled AMILOR study investigated the antiedematous effect of amiloride (starting dose 5 mg/day, max. 15 mg/day) in comparison to standard therapy with the loop diuretic furosemide (40 mg/day, max. 120 mg/day) over 16 days. Overhydration (OH) was measured by bioimpedance spectroscopy (BCM, Fresenius). Depending on the OH response, diuretic dose was adjusted on days 2, 5, 8 and 12, and if necessary, hydrochlorothiazide (HCT) was added from d8 (12.5 mg/day, max. 25 mg/day). The primary endpoint was the decrease in OH on d8. The study was terminated prematurely due to insufficient recruitment and a low statistical power due to a low actual effect size.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Median baseline OH was +26.4 (interquartile range 15.5–35.1)% extracellular water (ECW) in the amiloride arm and + 27.9 (24.1–29.4)% ECW in the furosemide arm and decreased by 1.95 (0.80–6.40) and 5.15 (0.90–8.30)% ECW after 8 days, respectively, and by 10.10 (1.30–14.40) and 7.40 (2.80–10.10)% ECW after 16 days, respectively. OH decrease on d8 and d16 was not significantly different between both arms.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>The AMILOR study is the first randomized controlled pilot study suggesting a similar antiedematous effect as furosemide. Further studies are required to better define the role of amiloride in NS (EudraCT 2019-002607-18).</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":107,"journal":{"name":"Acta Physiologica","volume":"240 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/apha.14183","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Physiologica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/apha.14183","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PHYSIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim

In rodent models of nephrotic syndrome (NS), edema formation was prevented by blockade of the epithelial sodium channel ENaC with amiloride. However, apart from case reports, there is no evidence favoring ENaC blockade in patients with NS.

Methods

The monocentric randomized controlled AMILOR study investigated the antiedematous effect of amiloride (starting dose 5 mg/day, max. 15 mg/day) in comparison to standard therapy with the loop diuretic furosemide (40 mg/day, max. 120 mg/day) over 16 days. Overhydration (OH) was measured by bioimpedance spectroscopy (BCM, Fresenius). Depending on the OH response, diuretic dose was adjusted on days 2, 5, 8 and 12, and if necessary, hydrochlorothiazide (HCT) was added from d8 (12.5 mg/day, max. 25 mg/day). The primary endpoint was the decrease in OH on d8. The study was terminated prematurely due to insufficient recruitment and a low statistical power due to a low actual effect size.

Results

Median baseline OH was +26.4 (interquartile range 15.5–35.1)% extracellular water (ECW) in the amiloride arm and + 27.9 (24.1–29.4)% ECW in the furosemide arm and decreased by 1.95 (0.80–6.40) and 5.15 (0.90–8.30)% ECW after 8 days, respectively, and by 10.10 (1.30–14.40) and 7.40 (2.80–10.10)% ECW after 16 days, respectively. OH decrease on d8 and d16 was not significantly different between both arms.

Conclusion

The AMILOR study is the first randomized controlled pilot study suggesting a similar antiedematous effect as furosemide. Further studies are required to better define the role of amiloride in NS (EudraCT 2019-002607-18).

Abstract Image

治疗肾病综合征患者水肿的氨苯蝶啶与呋塞米:试点研究(AMILOR)。
目的:在肾病综合征(NS)的啮齿类动物模型中,用阿米洛利阻断上皮钠通道ENaC可防止水肿形成。然而,除了病例报告外,还没有证据表明ENaC阻断疗法适用于NS患者:单中心随机对照 AMILOR 研究调查了阿米洛利(起始剂量 5 毫克/天,最大剂量 15 毫克/天)与襻利尿剂呋塞米(40 毫克/天,最大剂量 120 毫克/天)标准疗法在 16 天内的抗水肿效果比较。过量脱水(OH)通过生物阻抗光谱(BCM,费森尤斯公司)进行测量。根据OH反应,在第2、5、8和12天调整利尿剂剂量,如有必要,从第8天开始添加氢氯噻嗪(HCT)(12.5毫克/天,最高25毫克/天)。主要终点是第 8 天 OH 的下降。由于招募人数不足以及实际效应大小较低导致统计能力较低,研究提前结束:结果:氨苯蝶啶治疗组的基线OH中位数为+26.4(四分位距为15.5-35.1)%,呋塞米治疗组的基线OH中位数为+27.9(24.1-29.4)%,细胞外水分(ECW)下降了1.8天后,ECW分别下降了1.95(0.80-6.40)%和5.15(0.90-8.30)%;16天后,ECW分别下降了10.10(1.30-14.40)%和7.40(2.80-10.10)%。两组患者在第8天和第16天的OH下降率没有明显差异:AMILOR研究是首个随机对照试验研究,表明其抗水肿效果与呋塞米相似。要更好地确定氨苯蝶啶在NS中的作用,还需要进一步研究(EudraCT 2019-002607-18)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Acta Physiologica
Acta Physiologica 医学-生理学
CiteScore
11.80
自引率
15.90%
发文量
182
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Acta Physiologica is an important forum for the publication of high quality original research in physiology and related areas by authors from all over the world. Acta Physiologica is a leading journal in human/translational physiology while promoting all aspects of the science of physiology. The journal publishes full length original articles on important new observations as well as reviews and commentaries.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信