Why the study?
Currently, no meta-analyses evaluate the efficacy and safety of intermittent versus continuous furosemide for heart failure concomitant renal dysfunction.
Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Population
Patients with heart failure concomitant renal dysfunction in published RCTs
Comparison
Intermittent vs continuous furosemide
Design
Systematic review and meta-analysis protocol
BACKGROUND: Currently, there are no meta-analyses evaluating the efficacy and safety of intermittent vs continuous furosemide for heart failure concomitant renal dysfunction. Our protocol is conceived to evaluate the efficacy and safety of intermittent vs continuous furosemide for heart failure concomitant renal dysfunction. METHODS: We will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) reporting guidelines and the recommendations of the Cochrane Collaboration to conduct this meta-analysis. The systematic review protocol has been registered in Open Science Framework registries. The following databases including PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and EMBASE will be searched using the key phrases "loop diuretics," "furosemide," "heart failure," and "renal dysfunction" for all randomized clinical trials (RCTs) published up to May 2021. Revman 5.3 (Nordic Cochrane Centre, Denmark) will be used to complete the meta-analysis and generate forest plots. We will choose between a fixed effects and random effects model based upon the heterogeneity of included studies. Significance will be set at P < .05. RESULTS: Our protocol is conceived to test the hypothesis that continuous furosemide could lead to better outcomes in patients presenting with heart failure concomitant renal dysfunction. REGISTRATION NUMBER: 10.17605/OSF.IO/CQZRS.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chen et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: