↓ Skip to main content

American College of Cardiology

Article Metrics

Efficacy of Intravenous Furosemide Versus a Novel, pH-Neutral Furosemide Formulation Administered Subcutaneously in Outpatients With Worsening Heart Failure

Overview of attention for article published in JACC: Heart Failure, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#15 of 716)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
twitter
183 tweeters
facebook
5 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
22 Mendeley
Title
Efficacy of Intravenous Furosemide Versus a Novel, pH-Neutral Furosemide Formulation Administered Subcutaneously in Outpatients With Worsening Heart Failure
Published in
JACC: Heart Failure, November 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.jchf.2017.10.001
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nisha A. Gilotra, Oluseyi Princewill, Bonnie Marino, Ike S. Okwuosa, Jessica Chasler, Johana Almansa, Abby Cummings, Parker Rhodes, Julianne Chambers, Kimberly Cuomo, Stuart D. Russell

Abstract

This study sought to determine the efficacy and safety of a novel, pH-neutral formulation of furosemide administered subcutaneously (SC) for treatment of acute decompensated heart failure (HF). Congestion requiring intravenous (IV) administration of a diuretic agent is the main reason patients with HF present for acute medical care. Outpatients presenting with decompensated HF were randomized to receive a single SC or IV dose of furosemide. Primary outcome was 6-h urine output, and secondary outcomes were weight change, natriuresis, and adverse events. Forty-one patients were randomized: 19 were treated with IV (mean dose: 123 ± 47 mg) and 21 with SC furosemide (fixed dose of 80 mg over 5 h). The 6-h urine output in the IV group was not significantly different from that in the SC furosemide group (median IV: 1,425 ml; interquartile range [IQR]: 1,075 to 1,950 ml; vs. median SC: 1,350 ml; IQR: 900 to 1,900 ml; p = 0.84). Additionally, mean weight loss was not significantly different (-1.5 ± 1.1 kg in the IV group vs. -1.5 ± 1.2 kg in the SC group; p = 0.95). Hourly urine output was significantly higher in the IV group at hour 2 (425 ml in the IV group vs. 250 ml in the SC group; p = 0.02) and higher in the SC group at hour 6 (125 ml, IV group vs. 325 ml, SC group; p = 0.005). Natriuresis was higher in the SC group (IV: 7.3 ± 35.3 mEq/l vs. SC: 32.8 ± 43.6 mEq/l; p = 0.05). There was no worsening renal function, ototoxicity, or skin irritation with either formulation. Thirty-day hospitalization rates were similar. In this phase II trial, we did not identify significant differences between urine output obtained with pH-neutral furosemide administered SC and that obtained by IV. This method of decongestion may allow treatment at home and reduced HF resources and warrants further investigation. (Sub-Q Versus IV Furosemide in Acute Heart Failure; NCT02579057).

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 183 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 22 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 27%
Researcher 3 14%
Student > Postgraduate 3 14%
Unspecified 2 9%
Other 2 9%
Other 6 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 41%
Unspecified 4 18%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 9%
Social Sciences 2 9%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 5%
Other 4 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 136. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 June 2018.
All research outputs
#90,420
of 12,271,314 outputs
Outputs from JACC: Heart Failure
#15
of 716 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,026
of 344,468 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JACC: Heart Failure
#1
of 48 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,271,314 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 716 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 344,468 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 48 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.