Journal of the American College of Cardiology · 1996
Diuretic efficacy of high dose furosemide in severe heart failure: bolus injection versus continuous infusion.
Клиническое исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Dormans T P, van Meyel J J, Gerlag P G, Tan Y, Russel F G, Smits P
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: The efficacy of high dose furosemide as a continuous infusion was compared with a bolus injection of equal dose in patients with severe heart failure.
BACKGROUND: The delivery rate of furosemide into the nephron has been proved to be a determinant of diuretic efficacy in healthy volunteers.
METHODS: In a randomized crossover study we compared the efficacy of a continuous infusion of high dose furosemide (mean daily dosage 690 mg, range 250 to 2,000) versus a single bolus injection of an equal dose in 20 patients with severe heart failure. The patients received an equal dosage, either as a single intravenous bolus injection or as an 8-h continuous infusion preceded by a loading dose (20% of total dosage).
RESULTS: Mean (+/- SEM) daily urinary volume (infusion 2,860 +/- 240 ml, bolus 2,260 +/- 150 ml, p = 0.0005) and sodium excretion (infusion 210 +/- 40 mmol, bolus 150 +/- 20 mmol, p = 0.0045) were significantly higher after treatment with continuous infusion than with bolus injection, despite significantly lower urinary furosemide excretion (infusion 310 +/- 60 mg every 24 h, bolus 330 +/- 60 mg every 24 h, p = 0.0195). The maximal plasma furosemide concentration was significantly higher after bolus injection than during continuous infusion (infusion 24 +/- 5 micrograms/ml, bolus 95 +/- 20 micrograms/ml, p < 0.0001). Short-term, completely reversible hearing loss was reported only after bolus injection in 5 patients.
CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that in patients with severe heart failure, high dose furosemide administered as a continuous infusion is more efficacious than bolus injection and causes less ototoxic side effects.
BACKGROUND: The delivery rate of furosemide into the nephron has been proved to be a determinant of diuretic efficacy in healthy volunteers.
METHODS: In a randomized crossover study we compared the efficacy of a continuous infusion of high dose furosemide (mean daily dosage 690 mg, range 250 to 2,000) versus a single bolus injection of an equal dose in 20 patients with severe heart failure. The patients received an equal dosage, either as a single intravenous bolus injection or as an 8-h continuous infusion preceded by a loading dose (20% of total dosage).
RESULTS: Mean (+/- SEM) daily urinary volume (infusion 2,860 +/- 240 ml, bolus 2,260 +/- 150 ml, p = 0.0005) and sodium excretion (infusion 210 +/- 40 mmol, bolus 150 +/- 20 mmol, p = 0.0045) were significantly higher after treatment with continuous infusion than with bolus injection, despite significantly lower urinary furosemide excretion (infusion 310 +/- 60 mg every 24 h, bolus 330 +/- 60 mg every 24 h, p = 0.0195). The maximal plasma furosemide concentration was significantly higher after bolus injection than during continuous infusion (infusion 24 +/- 5 micrograms/ml, bolus 95 +/- 20 micrograms/ml, p < 0.0001). Short-term, completely reversible hearing loss was reported only after bolus injection in 5 patients.
CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that in patients with severe heart failure, high dose furosemide administered as a continuous infusion is more efficacious than bolus injection and causes less ototoxic side effects.