We assessed the handling of and response to oral bumetanide (1.0 and 2.0 mg) and to furosemide (40 and 80 mg) in 20 patients with stable, compensated congestive heart failure (CHF), comparing the two drugs and, in addition, examining differences from normal subjects. Bumetanide and furosemide were similar in time course of absorption, but patients with CHF had considerably prolonged absorption compared to normal subjects causing attainment of lower peak concentrations of drug. In both CHF and normal subjects, more bumetanide than furosemide was absorbed. The elimination half-life of furosemide was approximately twice that of bumetanide, and both were about two times longer than respective values in normal subjects. "Dose"-response curves were shifted downward from normal with both drugs. In patients with CHF, overall response did not differ between bumetanide and furosemide. The two drugs exhibit subtle differences, the clinical importance of which appears to be negligible from this study. Importantly, however, both drugs showed delayed absorption causing attainment of peak urinary excretion rates of diuretic two- to threefold lower than in normal subjects. This effect along with the abnormal responsivity of the tubule may contribute to the "resistance" to oral doses of diuretics observed clinically even though no quantitative malabsorption of drug occurs.

Furosemide and bumetanide share a number of characteristics including reduced natriuretic effects in azotemic patients. It has been presumed that this condition affects each drug equally. Previous studies, however, suggest dissimilar pathways of delivery to their sites of action. Though not rigorously tested, this potential disparity might cause them to differ when used in azotemia. We, therefore, assessed the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characteristics of intravenously administered furosemide and bumetanide in ten adult patients with stable, chronic renal insufficiency (mean creatinine clearance = 14.1 +/- 2.0 ml/min/1.73 m2) in a randomized, cross-over study during controlled sodium intake. Our goals were to assess differences in diuretic effectiveness and in so doing to determine the dose required to produce a maximal response. The mean diuretic doses of 172 and 4.3 mg for furosemide and bumetanide, respectively (ratio = 40:1) were sufficient to produce a maximum response. Despite similarities in maximal fractional excretion of sodium (18.2 +/- 2.6% with furosemide vs. 19.4 +/- 4.5% with bumetanide, P = 0.687) demonstrating an equal tubular responsiveness to both drugs, overall response as quantified by cumulative natriuresis in the initial eight hour period was 52% greater with furosemide (108 +/- 17 vs. 71 +/- 7 mEq; P = 0.042). The difference in total excreted sodium was accounted for by a preserved nonrenal clearance of bumetanide (113 +/- 12 compared to 53 +/- 5 ml/min for furosemide, P = 0.001) which resulted in relatively less bumetanide in serum available to be delivered into the urine.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Changes in response to furosemide and other diuretics in patients with congestive heart failure (CHF) could occur because of disease-induced changes in absorption of the drug or changes in disposition which affect its access to its site of action. A difference was not found in the bioavailability of forosemide in patients with CHF compared to normal volunteers, 31 +/- 12 vs. 38 +/- 20% (mean +/- sd), respectively. Both groups showed considerable interindividual variability, though serial analyses within individuals revealed consistency. Amounts of furosemide delivered into the urine after an intravenous dose correlated significantly to that after an oral dose implying that the interindividual variability is not caused primarily by variability in absorption in either group. Overall, disposition kinetics of furosemide did not differ between groups. Because of heterogeneity of renal and cardiac function among the patients, we were able to demonstrate correlations of plasma and renal clearance of furosemide with renal function; in turn, renal function correlated with left ventricular ejection fraction. Consequently, some patients had changes in furosemide disposition, but, for the most part, differences in response to furosemide were caused by abnormal responses to, rather than changed handling of the diuretic.