Ultrafiltration versus intravenous loop diuretics in patients with acute decompensated heart failure: a meta-analysis of clinical trials.

Background Intravenous loop diuretics are the first-line therapy for acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) but many patients are discharged with unresolved congestion resulting in higher re-hospitalization and mortality rates. Ultrafiltration (UF) is a promising intervention for ADHF. However, studies comparing UF to diuretics have been inconsistent in their clinical outcomes. Methods A comprehensive literature search was performed. Trials were included if they met the following criteria: (1) randomization with a control group, (2) comparison of UF with a loop diuretic, and (3) a diagnosis of ADHF. Results When compared to diuretics, UF was associated with a reduced risk of clinical worsening (odds ratio (OR) 0.57, 95% CI: 0.38-0.86, P-value 0.007), increased likelihood for clinical decongestion (OR 2.32, 95% CI: 1.09-4.91, P-value 0.03) with greater weight (0.97 Kg, 95% CI: 0.52-1.42, P-value <0.0001) and volume reduction (1.11 L, 95% CI: 0.68-1.54, P-value <0.0001). The overall risk of re-hospitalization (OR 0.92, 95% CI: 0.62-1.38, P-value 0.70), return to emergency department (OR 0.69, 95% CI: 0.44-1.08, P-value 0.10) and mortality (OR 0.99, 95% CI: 0.60-1.62, P-value 0.97) were not significantly improved by UF treatment. Conclusions UF is associated with significant improvements in clinical decongestion but not in rates of re-hospitalization or mortality.