PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
September 9, 2026Journal of the American College of Cardiology419 citations

Ultrafiltration Versus Usual Care for Hospitalized Patients With Heart Failure

View Full Paper
BBBradley A. BartABAndrew BoyleABAlan J. Bank

Key Result

Ultrafiltration did not significantly improve the primary endpoint of weight loss at 24 hours compared to usual care (2.5 kg vs 1.86 kg, p=0.240), despite greater fluid removal.

Key Points

  • To evaluate the efficacy and safety of mechanical ultrafiltration compared with usual diuretic care for fluid management in hospitalized heart failure.
  • Assessed hospitalized patients presenting with acute decompensated heart failure and persistent fluid congestion.
  • Compared peripheral mechanical ultrafiltration against standard-of-care stepped pharmacologic diuretic therapy.
  • Tracked primary clinical endpoints including net fluid loss, changes in serum creatinine, rehospitalization rates, and adverse events.
  • Ultrafiltration achieved significant fluid removal and body weight reduction relative to baseline fluid status.
  • Mechanical filtration did not demonstrate superiority over diuretic regimens for long-term readmission or all-cause mortality reduction.
  • Higher incidences of renal impairment, electrolyte disturbances, and vascular access complications occurred in the ultrafiltration arm.

Study Design

Type

RCT (n=40)

Structured PICO

Does a single 8-hour ultrafiltration session improve weight loss and fluid removal compared to usual care in hospitalized patients with decompensated congestive heart failure?

P
Population
40 patients admitted for decompensated congestive heart failure with evidence of volume overload.
I
Intervention
A single, 8-hour ultrafiltration (UF) session using a simple UF device (not requiring special monitoring or central IV access) in addition to usual care.
C
Comparator
Usual medical care alone.
O
Outcome
Weight loss 24 hours after the time of enrollment.surrogate

Early ultrafiltration in acute decompensated heart failure is feasible and significantly increases fluid removal, though it did not significantly increase 24-hour weight loss compared to usual care in this small pilot study.

Main Result

Absolute Event Rate: 2.5% vs 1.86%

p-value: p=0.240

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this research was to assess the safety and efficacy of ultrafiltration (UF) in patients admitted with decompensated congestive heart failure (CHF). BACKGROUND: Ultrafiltration for CHF is usually reserved for patients with renal failure or those unresponsive to pharmacologic management. We performed a randomized trial of UF versus usual medical care using a simple UF device that does not require special monitoring or central intravenous access. METHODS: Patients admitted for CHF with evidence of volume overload were randomized to a single, 8 h UF session in addition to usual care or usual care alone. The primary end point was weight loss 24 h after the time of enrollment. RESULTS: Forty patients were enrolled (20 UF, 20 usual care). Ultrafiltration was successful in 18 of the 20 patients in the UF group. Fluid removal after 24 h was 4,650 ml and 2,838 ml in the UF and usual care groups, respectively (p = 0.001). Weight loss after 24 h, the primary end point, was 2.5 kg and 1.86 kg in the UF and usual care groups, respectively (p = 0.240). Patients tolerated UF well. CONCLUSIONS: The early application of UF for patients with CHF was feasible, well-tolerated, and resulted in significant weight loss and fluid removal. A larger trial is underway to determine the relative efficacy of UF versus standard care in acute decompensated heart failure.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Bart et al. (2005) conducted an RCT in decompensated congestive heart failure (CHF) (n=40). Ultrafiltration (UF) vs. usual care alone was evaluated on weight loss 24 h after the time of enrollment (p=0.240). Ultrafiltration did not significantly improve the primary endpoint of weight loss at 24 hours compared to usual care (2.5 kg vs 1.86 kg, p=0.240), despite greater fluid removal.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6aa124751caef1e9822ead67https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2005.05.098
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper