Comparative Analysis of Long-Term Outcomes of Torasemide and Furosemide in Heart Failure Patients in Heart Failure Registries of the European Society of Cardiology

PurposeCurrent clinical recommendations do not emphasise superiority of any of diuretics, but available reports are very encouraging and suggest beneficial effects of torasemide. This study aimed to compare the effect of torasemide and furosemide on long-term outcomes and New York Heart Association (NYHA) class change in patients with chronic heart failure (HF).MethodsOf 2019 patients enrolled in Polish parts of the heart failure registries of the European Society of Cardiology (Pilot and Long-Term), 1440 patients treated with a loop diuretic were included in the analysis. The main analysis was performed on matched cohorts of HF patients treated with furosemide and torasemide using propensity score matching.ResultsTorasemide was associated with a similar primary endpoint (all-cause death; 9.8% vs. 14.1%; p=0.13) occurrence and 23.8% risk reduction of the secondary endpoint (a composite of all-cause death or hospitalisation for worsening HF; 26.4% vs. 34.7%; p=0.04). Treatment with both torasemide and furosemide was associated with the significantly most frequent occurrence of the primary (23.8%) and secondary (59.2%) endpoints. In the matched cohort after 12months, NYHA class was higher in the furosemide group (p=0.04), while furosemide use was associated with a higher risk (20.0% vs. 12.9%; p=0.03) of worsening 1 NYHA class. Torasemide use impacted positively upon the primary endpoint occurrence, especially in younger patients (aged <65years) and with dilated cardiomyopathy.ConclusionsOur findings contribute to the body of research on the optimal diuretic choice. Torasemide may have advantageous influence on NYHA class and long-term outcomes of HF patients, especially younger patients or those with dilated cardiomyopathy, but it needs further investigations in prospective randomised trials.