Acutely Decompensated Heart Failure in a County Emergency Department: A Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Comparison of Nesiritide Versus Placebo Treatment
Study objective
Acutely decompensated congestive heart failure is a major cause of emergency department (ED) visits in county hospitals. This often underserved population has a high rate of return visits to the ED for heart failure. Nesiritide has been demonstrated to relieve symptoms of acutely decompensated congestive heart failure. We examined the effect of an 8-hour infusion of nesiritide on the composite of return to the ED or hospitalization at 30 days.
Methods
A prospective, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial of nesiritide plus protocol-specified standard therapy versus standard therapy done in the ED for acutely decompensated congestive heart failure.
Results
One hundred one patients were randomized during a 16-month enrollment period. Sixty-six percent of the patients were men and 34% were women. Fifty-six percent were black; all patients had New York Heart Association class II to IV heart failure and most had dyspnea at rest or with minimal exertion. Complete follow-up data were available in 97 of 101 patients. After the 8-hour treatment period, acute symptom relief was experienced in 95.7% of the nesiritide group (95% confidence interval [CI] 88.9% to 100%) versus 86.8% of the placebo group (95% CI 72% to 98.9%), with an absolute difference between the 2 groups of 8.9% (95% CI –3.3% to 24.2%). Diuresis was similar between the 2 groups, but hypotension occurred more frequently in the nesiritide-treated group. The primary outcome measure of return visit to the ED or hospitalization at 30 days was higher for nesiritide (41.5%) than placebo (39.6%; absolute difference 1.9%; 95% CI –17.2% to 21.1%). There was only 1 death. No measurable change in renal function was observed.
Conclusion
Administration of nesiritide for acutely decompensated congestive heart failure in a county ED was no better than standard therapy alone for return to the ED or hospitalization at 30 days.
To access this article, please choose from the options below
Supervising editor: Judd E. Hollander, MD
Author contributions: AHM and SN obtained institutional review board approval. AHM, SN, and BE collected data. AHM, BE, AP, and CY analyzed data. AHM and AP conducted the statistical analysis. AHM, PP, and CWY developed the article. AHM takes responsibility for the paper as a whole.
Funding and support: By Annals policy, all authors are required to disclose any and all commercial, financial, and other relationships in any way related to the subject of this article, that might create any potential conflict of interest. This project was supported by grant number KL2RR024983 from the National Center for Research Resources (NCRR), a component of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and the NIH Roadmap for Medical Research, and its contents are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of the NCRR or NIH. This study was an investigator-initiated protocol, independently designed, initiated, supervised and analyzed by the investigators but funded by an unrestricted research grant from Scios, Inc. CWY is a consultant for GlaxoSmithKline, Scios, Inc., NitroMred, Medtronic, AstraZeneca, Otsuka and has received grants and research support from GlaxoSmithKline, Scios Inc., NitroMed, and Medtronic. CWY has also received CHF Fellowship salary support from Medtronic and Scios, Inc. CWY is on the speaker's bureau for GlaxoSmithKline and Novartis. See the Manuscript Submission Agreement in this issue for examples of specific conflicts covered by this statement.
Publication date: Available online March 4, 2008.
PII: S0196-0644(07)01852-5
doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2007.12.003
© 2008 American College of Emergency Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Refers to article:
- Can We Improve How We Treat Patients With Heart Failure in the Emergency Department? , 17 March 2008
