J Clin Pharmacol
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Whelton, A
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Whelton, A
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Articles

Long-term bumetanide treatment of renal edema. Comparison with furosemide

A Whelton

In an open, parallel, randomized study, bumetanide was compared with furosemide in the long-term management of patients with severe renal edema. The doses used were: bumetanide, 1 mg; furosemide, 40 mg. Graded increases were administered to daily maxima of 10 mg bumetanide and 400 mg furosemide. The efficacy of parameters measured were: weight, recumbent and standing pulse and blood pressure, abdominal girth, and estimated degree of malaise or fatigue when present. Safety parameters included: physical examination, CBC and platelets, blood chemistry, chemical and microscopic urinalysis, creatinine clearance, air audiometry, and ophthalmic examination. Weight loss and reduction of edema and of mean arterial pressure occurred in both groups of patients. In the bumetanide-treated group, weight loss was statistically significant at most observation times during the first eight weeks, and reduction in edema was significant throughout the trial (P less than 0.05). Reduction in these parameters in the furosemide-treated patients was not statistically significant. However, the differences between the diuresis and other changes produced by the two drugs were not significant. While reduction in the mean arterial pressure of patients on bumetanide was significant (P less than 0.05), the difference with that in the furosemide treatment group was not significant. Serum electrolyte abnormalities were infrequent. All patients tolerated the drug trial well. No deterioration in audiometry occurred in any patients, including 12 who entered the trial with abnormal air audiograms. Both drugs appear to be equally safe. While a daily dose of 4.2 mg bumetanide is highly effective in severe renal edema, the design of the study did not warrant definitive conclusion regarding comparative efficacy with furosemide.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
The Annals of PharmacotherapyHome page
K. A Wargo and W. M Banta
A Comprehensive Review of the Loop Diuretics: Should Furosemide Be First Line?
Ann. Pharmacother., November 1, 2009; 43(11): 1836 - 1847.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1981 by the American College of Clinical Pharmacology