Articles |

Intermittent administration of furosemide vs continuous infusion preceded by a loading dose for congestive heart failure. FREE TO VIEW

M Lahav; A Regev; P Ra'anani; E Theodor
Chest. 1992;102(3):725-731. doi:10.1378/chest.102.3.725
Text Size: A A A
Published online


Several reports have suggested that continuous intravenous administration of loop diuretics may be superior to intermittent administration. We performed a prospective randomized crossover study comparing intermittent intravenous administration (IA) of furosemide with continuous infusion following a single loading dose (LDCI) in nine patients with severe congestive heart failure. At the time of hospital admission, patients were randomly assigned to one of two treatment groups. One group (four patients) received an IV bolus injection of furosemide followed immediately by a continuous infusion for 48 h. The second group (five patients) was treated with three IV bolus injections a day for 48 h. Total doses of furosemide were equivalent in the two groups. After 48 h, each patient was crossed over to the other method and treated for an additional 48 h. LDCI produced significantly greater diuresis and natriuresis than IA (total urine output increased by 12 to 26 percent, total sodium excretion increased by 11 to 33 percent) (p less than 0.01). There were no significant differences in side effects between the two methods. These results indicate that LDCI may be a preferred method for administration of furosemide in patients with congestive heart failure.




Citing articles are presented as examples only. In non-demo SCM6 implementation, integration with CrossRef’s "Cited By" API will populate this tab (http://www.crossref.org/citedby.html).

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

Find Similar Articles
CHEST Journal Articles
PubMed Articles
  • CHEST Journal
    Print ISSN: 0012-3692
    Online ISSN: 1931-3543