Acetazolamide versus metolazone as adjunctive therapy to loop diuretics in hospitalized patients with volume overload: A retrospective cohort study

Clicks: 4
ID: 324690
2026
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal

Ranked #71 of 143 articles by views in American journal of health-system pharmacy : AJHP : official journal of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 143 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
PURPOSE: Sequential nephron blockade is commonly used to augment diuresis in patients with volume overload receiving loop diuretics. While metolazone is frequently used, acetazolamide has emerged as an alternative adjunctive agent. Real-world data comparing these strategies remain limited. This study evaluated the effectiveness and safety of acetazolamide vs metolazone as adjunctive therapy. METHODS: This single-center, retrospective cohort study included adult patients receiving adjunctive acetazolamide or metolazone with loop diuretics for volume overload. The primary outcome was cumulative urine output within 48 hours. Secondary outcomes included high diuretic response (urine output above the cohort median), hypotension, acute kidney injury, hypokalemia, and metabolic acidosis. Multivariable regression and propensity score-matched analyses were performed. RESULTS: A total of 120 patients were included (metolazone, n = 70; acetazolamide, n = 50). Patients receiving metolazone were older and had higher baseline serum creatinine levels. Mean (SD) cumulative urine output was greater with acetazolamide (10,637 [13,847] vs 5,752 [10,231] mL; P = 0.028). After adjustment, acetazolamide remained associated with greater urine output (β = 4,735 mL; 95% confidence interval [CI], 39-9,430 mL; P = 0.048). High diuretic response occurred more frequently with acetazolamide (64% vs 40%), with higher adjusted odds (odds ratio, 3.18; 95% CI, 1.40-7.47; P = 0.0065). Findings were consistent in propensity score-matched analyses. Adverse event rates were similar between the groups. CONCLUSION: Adjunctive acetazolamide was associated with greater urine output and a higher likelihood of achieving a robust diuretic response compared with metolazone. Given the retrospective study design, these findings are hypothesis generating and warrant confirmation in prospective comparative studies.
Reference Key
openalex_W7202202886 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Phuoc Bui, Lizbeth Ramos
Journal American journal of health-system pharmacy : AJHP : official journal of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/ajhp/zxag236
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/ajhp/zxag236
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.