Outcomes of Bolus Dose Furosemide Versus Continuous Infusion in Patients With Acute Decompensated Left Ventricular Failure and Atrial Fibrillation

Abstract

Background

This prospective, randomized trial aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of different intravenous diuretic regimens in acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) patients.

Methods

ADHF patients were enrolled and randomized into three groups: continuous intravenous furosemide infusion (cIV), bolus furosemide injection (bI), and furosemide plus hypertonic saline solution (HSS). Clinical outcomes were assessed over 48 h.

Results

In a study involving 1276 patients admitted for ADHF, three therapeutic regimens (T × 1, T × 2, and T × 3) were compared. T × 1 administered an 80 mg furosemide intravenous bolus infusion twice daily to 479 patients, while T × 2 involved a continuous 16-h infusion of 160 mg furosemide daily to 420 patients. T × 3 treated 377 patients with 160 mg furosemide combined with 150 mL of HSS containing 1.95% NaCl over 30 min. Yet, overall changes in renal markers such as BUN, Na, K, and serum creatinine did not differ significantly. Analysis of prespecified study endpoints revealed notable variations in hospitalization length among the treatment arms. T × 1 demonstrated a significantly shorter hospital stay (3.7 days) compared to T × 2 (6.6 days) and T × 3 (7.9 days). Conversely, alterations in serum creatinine at 48 h, overall changes in serum creatinine, body weight loss, and serum potassium levels did not significantly differ among the treatment groups.

Conclusion

While intravenous bolus of furosemide showed potential benefits in reducing hospitalization duration, limitations such as a small sample size and short-term observation emphasize the need for larger studies to validate these outcomes further.