Continuous infusion of furosemide may be the preferred route for managing diuretic refractory heart failure compared to traditional bolus dosing.
Does continuous infusion loop diuretics improve management of edema and congestion compared to bolus dosing in adults with decompensated heart failure?
Continuous infusion of loop diuretics may be preferable to bolus dosing in patients with diuretic-refractory decompensated heart failure.
In an aging population, decompensated heart failure accounts for a significant number of hospital admissions. The standard management for edema and congestion associated with heart failure is loop diuretic therapy. Traditionally, bolus-dosed furosemide has been used to manage the edema and congestion associated with heart failure. However, diuretic resistance can occur with bolus dosing, resulting in inadequate diuresis and further hemodynamic instability. Based on current literature, furosemide given by continuous infusion may now be the preferred agent and route for diuretic refractory heart failure. This article reviews the literature that compares bolus versus continuous infusion loop diuretics in adult heart failure.
Ravnan et al. (Tue,) conducted a review in Adult Heart Failure. Continuous infusion loop diuretics vs. Bolus-dosed loop diuretics was evaluated. Continuous infusion of furosemide may be the preferred route for managing diuretic refractory heart failure compared to traditional bolus dosing.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: