This study evaluates the clinical efficacy of subcutaneously administered Furosemide Injection Solution versus intravenous administration of Furosemide Injection, United States Pharmacopeia (USP) in adult patients presenting to a heart failure clinic with decompensated heart failure. Half of the patients will receive a subcutaneously administered Furosemide Injection Solution; the other half will receive an intravenous administration of Furosemide Injection.
The prevalence of chronic heart failure is increasing, and despite advances in the treatment of chronic heart failure, in-hospital mortality and readmission are high. Heart failure costs the US about 32 billion per year, and a large percentage of the costs are due to hospitalizations. Most clinicians would agree that patients with decompensated heart failure presenting with hypotension, worsening renal function and altered mental status should be hospitalized. However, there is a subset of patients presenting with dyspnea and edema due to volume overload that necessitate rapid symptom improvement but are hemodynamically stable. Oral diuretics would likely be ineffective but hospital admission for IV diuretics seems excessive. The research hypothesis is that subcutaneously administered furosemide will be an effective alternative to IV furosemide for hemodynamically stable chronic heart failure patients presenting with volume overload in the ambulatory setting. Patients will be randomized to receive Furosemide Injection, USP intravenously or Furosemide Injection Solution (SCP-101) delivered subcutaneously. The IV patients will get the usual care of the heart failure clinic, which includes having an IV placed and delivery of a one-time dose of IV furosemide with the dose determined by the providers (maximum dose 160mg IV). The subcutaneous patients will receive 80mg of Furosemide Injection Solution (SCP-101) administered subcutaneously over 5 hours (30mg in first hour and 12.5mg/hour for 4 hours). Both groups of patients will be observed for 6 hours to assess diuresis. Patients will be asked to fill out a survey about their symptom improvement (Kansas City Cardiomyopathy questionnaire) and overall satisfaction related to the treatment experience. They will also be monitored for side effects including ototoxicity and discomfort at the access site (burning, itching, and pain). Electrolytes and renal function will be checked once after the patients receive diuretic therapy.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Enrollment
40
Johns Hopkins Hospital Heart Failure Bridge Clinic
Baltimore, Maryland, United States
Urine Output
The volume of urine produced in milliliters over the 6 hours after drug delivery will be measured.
Time frame: 6-hour period
Heart Failure Symptom Scoring/Symptom Improvement
Will evaluate if subjective heart failure symptoms improve over the period of diuresis. Measured by Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire
Time frame: 6-hour period
Number of Participants With Side Effects
Cumulative total of pain, local skin reactions (including hematoma and induration) and electrolyte abnormalities.
Time frame: Up to 6 hours
Urine Sodium
Total urinary sodium produced during the 6 hour urine collection
Time frame: 6-hour period
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.