Continuous infusion versus intermittent bolus furosemide in acute decompensated heart failure

What is it about?

This review demonstrates the clinical effectiveness of continuous infusion versus intermittent bolus injection of furosemide in acute decompensated heart failure with fluid overload. It showed that continuous infusion of furosemide was superior to bolus administration with regard to diuretic effects and reduction in brain natriuretic peptite, a biomarker for heart failure. Neither had any difference in all-cause mortality, length of hospital stay and electrolyte disturbance.

Featured Image

Why is it important?

Goal-directed therapy is believed to be associated with lower mortality and morbidity in critically ill patients. The findings of this review will be useful in achieving the desired fluid balance in patients with fluid overload. We have demonstrated that continuous infusion of furosemide could lead to better diuretic effects (more urine output and more weight loss) as compared to the bolus one. However, there was no difference in all-cause mortality, length of hospital stay and electrolytes disturbance.

Perspectives