Take-down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.

The vast majority of acute heart failure episodes are characterized by increasing symptoms and signs of congestion with volume overload. The goal of therapy in those patients is the relief of congestion through achieving a state of euvolaemia, mainly through the use of diuretic therapy. The appropriate use of diuretics however remains challenging, especially when worsening renal function, diuretic resistance and electrolyte disturbances occur. This position paper focuses on the use of diuretics in heart failure with congestion. The manuscript addresses frequently encountered challenges, such as (i) evaluation of congestion and clinical euvolaemia, (ii) assessment of diuretic response/resistance in the treatment of acute heart failure, (iii) an approach towards stepped pharmacologic diuretic strategies, based upon diuretic response, and (iv) management of common electrolyte disturbances. Recommendations are made in line with available guidelines, evidence and expert opinion.

Background-Overly aggressive diuresis leading to intravascular volume depletion has been proposed as a cause for worsening renal function during the treatment of decompensated heart failure. If diuresis occurs at a rate greater than extravascular fluid can refill the intravascular space, the concentration of such intravascular substances as hemoglobin and plasma proteins increases. We hypothesized that hemoconcentration would be associated with worsening renal function and possibly would provide insight into the relationship between aggressive decongestion and outcomes. Methods and Results-Subjects in the Evaluation Study of Congestive Heart Failure and Pulmonary Artery CatheterizationEffectiveness trial limited data set with a baseline/discharge pair of hematocrit, albumin, or total protein values were included (336 patients). Baseline-to-discharge increases in these parameters were evaluated, and patients with Ն2 in the top tertile were considered to have evidence of hemoconcentration. The group experiencing hemoconcentration received higher doses of loop diuretics, lost more weight/fluid, and had greater reductions in filling pressures (PϽ0.05 for all).Hemoconcentration was strongly associated with worsening renal function (odds ratio, 5.3; PϽ0.001), whereas changes in right atrial pressure (Pϭ0.36) and pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (Pϭ0.53) were not. Patients with hemoconcentration had significantly lower 180-day mortality (hazard ratio, 0.31; Pϭ0.013). This relationship persisted after adjustment for baseline characteristics (hazard ratio, 0.16; Pϭ0.001). Conclusion-Hemoconcentration

Appropriate interpretation of changes in markers of kidney function is essential during the treatment of acute and chronic heart failure. Historically, kidney function was primarily assessed by serum creatinine and the calculation of estimated glomerular filtration rate. An increase in serum creatinine, also termed worsening renal function, commonly occurs in patients with heart failure, especially during acute heart failure episodes. Even though worsening renal function is associated with worse outcome on a population level, the interpretation of such changes within the appropriate clinical context helps to correctly assess risk and determine further treatment strategies. Additionally, it is becoming increasingly recognized that assessment of kidney function is more than just glomerular filtration rate alone. As such, a better evaluation of sodium and water handling by the renal tubules allows to determine the efficiency of loop diuretics (loop diuretic response and efficiency). Also, though neurohumoral blockers may induce modest deteriorations in glomerular filtration rate, their use is associated with improved long‐term outcome. Therefore, a better understanding of the role of cardio–renal interactions in heart failure in symptom development, disease progression and prognosis is essential. Indeed, perhaps even misinterpretation of kidney function is a leading cause of not attaining decongestion in acute heart failure and insufficient dosing of guideline‐directed medical therapy in general. This position paper of the Heart Failure Association Working Group on Cardio‐Renal Dysfunction aims at improving insights into the interpretation of renal function assessment in the different heart failure states, with the goal of improving heart failure care.

Summary Background Acute kidney injury often goes unrecognised in its early stages when effective treatment options might be available. We aimed to determine whether an automated electronic alert for acute kidney injury would reduce the severity of such injury and improve clinical outcomes in patients in hospital. Methods In this investigator-masked, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial, patients were recruited from the hospital of the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, PA, USA. Eligible participants were adults aged 18 years or older who were in hospital with stage 1 or greater acute kidney injury as defined by Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes creatinine-based criteria. Exclusion criteria were initial hospital creatinine 4·0 mg/dL (to convert to μmol/L, multiply by 88·4) or greater, fewer than two creatinine values measured, inability to determine the covering provider, admission to hospice or the observation unit, previous randomisation, or end-stage renal disease. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via a computer-generated sequence to receive an acute kidney injury alert (a text-based alert sent to the covering provider and unit pharmacist indicating new acute kidney injury) or usual care, stratified by medical versus surgical admission and intensive care unit versus non-intensive care unit location in blocks of 4–8 participants. The primary outcome was a composite of relative maximum change in creatinine, dialysis, and death at 7 days after randomisation. All analyses were by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01862419. Findings Between Sept 17, 2013, and April 14, 2014, 23 664 patients were screened. 1201 eligible participants were assigned to the acute kidney injury alert group and 1192 were assigned to the usual care group. Composite relative maximum change in creatinine, dialysis, and death at 7 days did not differ between the alert group and the usual care group (p=0·88), or within any of the four randomisation strata (all p>0·05). At 7 days after randomisation, median maximum relative change in creatinine concentrations was 0·0% (IQR 0·0–18·4) in the alert group and 0·6% (0·0–17·5) in the usual care group (p=0·81); 87 (7·2%) patients in the alert group and 70 (5·9%) patients in usual care group had received dialysis (odds ratio 1·25 [95% CI 0·90–1·74]; p=0·18); and 71 (5·9%) patients in the alert group and 61 (5·1%) patients in the usual care group had died (1·16 [0·81–1·68]; p=0·40). Interpretation An electronic alert system for acute kidney injury did not improve clinical outcomes among patients in hospital. Funding Penn Center for Healthcare Improvement and Patient Safety.