Inci Tugce Colluoglu, Tugba Kapansahin, Ahmet Bertug Celik, Yesim Akın
{"title":"循环利尿剂和心力衰竭的死亡率:一项倾向评分匹配研究","authors":"Inci Tugce Colluoglu, Tugba Kapansahin, Ahmet Bertug Celik, Yesim Akın","doi":"10.1155/ijcp/5524617","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>While loop diuretics remain a cornerstone of heart failure (HF) management, evidence directly comparing the clinical outcomes of torasemide and furosemide is still not clear.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>We aimed to assess the comparison of mortality between furosemide and torasemide in patients with HF.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>This single-center, retrospective, and observational cohort study included 627 patients with HF who were regularly prescribed furosemide or torasemide and were admitted to the emergency department or cardiology outpatient clinic between January 1, 2022, and June 30, 2023. Patients were divided into the two groups as follows: the furosemide group and the torasemide group. The primary outcome was defined as 1-year all-cause mortality. The primary outcome was assessed by Kaplan−Meier analyses in the whole study population and the 1:1 propensity score−matched cohort.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Of 627 eligible patients with HF, 497 were treated with furosemide, while 130 received torasemide. After propensity score matching analysis, 82 patients with HF in the furosemide group were compared with 82 patients with HF in the torasemide group. In the furosemide group, 1-year all-cause mortality was observed in 15 (18.3%) patients with HF, compared to 13 (15.9%) patients with HF in the torasemide group (<i>p</i>: 0.678). Kaplan−Meier analysis showed that cumulative survival rates were comparable between the HF patients treated with furosemide and those treated with torasemide (log-rank <i>p</i>: 0.661).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>In patients with HF, treatment with torasemide was associated with similar 1-year all-cause mortality compared to furosemide, underscoring the absence of a detectable prognostic difference between the two loop diuretic strategies.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":13782,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Clinical Practice","volume":"2026 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-04-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1155/ijcp/5524617","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Loop Diuretics and Mortality in Heart Failure: A Propensity Score–Matched Study\",\"authors\":\"Inci Tugce Colluoglu, Tugba Kapansahin, Ahmet Bertug Celik, Yesim Akın\",\"doi\":\"10.1155/ijcp/5524617\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>While loop diuretics remain a cornerstone of heart failure (HF) management, evidence directly comparing the clinical outcomes of torasemide and furosemide is still not clear.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Objectives</h3>\\n \\n <p>We aimed to assess the comparison of mortality between furosemide and torasemide in patients with HF.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>This single-center, retrospective, and observational cohort study included 627 patients with HF who were regularly prescribed furosemide or torasemide and were admitted to the emergency department or cardiology outpatient clinic between January 1, 2022, and June 30, 2023. Patients were divided into the two groups as follows: the furosemide group and the torasemide group. The primary outcome was defined as 1-year all-cause mortality. The primary outcome was assessed by Kaplan−Meier analyses in the whole study population and the 1:1 propensity score−matched cohort.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Of 627 eligible patients with HF, 497 were treated with furosemide, while 130 received torasemide. After propensity score matching analysis, 82 patients with HF in the furosemide group were compared with 82 patients with HF in the torasemide group. In the furosemide group, 1-year all-cause mortality was observed in 15 (18.3%) patients with HF, compared to 13 (15.9%) patients with HF in the torasemide group (<i>p</i>: 0.678). Kaplan−Meier analysis showed that cumulative survival rates were comparable between the HF patients treated with furosemide and those treated with torasemide (log-rank <i>p</i>: 0.661).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>In patients with HF, treatment with torasemide was associated with similar 1-year all-cause mortality compared to furosemide, underscoring the absence of a detectable prognostic difference between the two loop diuretic strategies.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13782,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Clinical Practice\",\"volume\":\"2026 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2026-04-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1155/ijcp/5524617\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Clinical Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/ijcp/5524617\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Clinical Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/ijcp/5524617","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Loop Diuretics and Mortality in Heart Failure: A Propensity Score–Matched Study
Background
While loop diuretics remain a cornerstone of heart failure (HF) management, evidence directly comparing the clinical outcomes of torasemide and furosemide is still not clear.
Objectives
We aimed to assess the comparison of mortality between furosemide and torasemide in patients with HF.
Methods
This single-center, retrospective, and observational cohort study included 627 patients with HF who were regularly prescribed furosemide or torasemide and were admitted to the emergency department or cardiology outpatient clinic between January 1, 2022, and June 30, 2023. Patients were divided into the two groups as follows: the furosemide group and the torasemide group. The primary outcome was defined as 1-year all-cause mortality. The primary outcome was assessed by Kaplan−Meier analyses in the whole study population and the 1:1 propensity score−matched cohort.
Results
Of 627 eligible patients with HF, 497 were treated with furosemide, while 130 received torasemide. After propensity score matching analysis, 82 patients with HF in the furosemide group were compared with 82 patients with HF in the torasemide group. In the furosemide group, 1-year all-cause mortality was observed in 15 (18.3%) patients with HF, compared to 13 (15.9%) patients with HF in the torasemide group (p: 0.678). Kaplan−Meier analysis showed that cumulative survival rates were comparable between the HF patients treated with furosemide and those treated with torasemide (log-rank p: 0.661).
Conclusions
In patients with HF, treatment with torasemide was associated with similar 1-year all-cause mortality compared to furosemide, underscoring the absence of a detectable prognostic difference between the two loop diuretic strategies.
期刊介绍:
IJCP is a general medical journal. IJCP gives special priority to work that has international appeal.
IJCP publishes:
Editorials. IJCP Editorials are commissioned. [Peer reviewed at the editor''s discretion]
Perspectives. Most IJCP Perspectives are commissioned. Example. [Peer reviewed at the editor''s discretion]
Study design and interpretation. Example. [Always peer reviewed]
Original data from clinical investigations. In particular: Primary research papers from RCTs, observational studies, epidemiological studies; pre-specified sub-analyses; pooled analyses. [Always peer reviewed]
Meta-analyses. [Always peer reviewed]
Systematic reviews. From October 2009, special priority will be given to systematic reviews. [Always peer reviewed]
Non-systematic/narrative reviews. From October 2009, reviews that are not systematic will be considered only if they include a discrete Methods section that must explicitly describe the authors'' approach. Special priority will, however, be given to systematic reviews. [Always peer reviewed]
''How to…'' papers. Example. [Always peer reviewed]
Consensus statements. [Always peer reviewed] Short reports. [Always peer reviewed]
Letters. [Peer reviewed at the editor''s discretion]
International scope
IJCP publishes work from investigators globally. Around 30% of IJCP articles list an author from the UK. Around 30% of IJCP articles list an author from the USA or Canada. Around 45% of IJCP articles list an author from a European country that is not the UK. Around 15% of articles published in IJCP list an author from a country in the Asia-Pacific region.