Oral Furosemide and Hydrochlorothiazide/Amiloride versus Intravenous Furosemide for the Treatment of Resistant Nephrotic Syndrome

Abstract

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 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.

Keywords

• diuretic
• furosemide
• hydrochlorothiazide
• amiloride
• nephrotic syndrome
• resistant