Abstract
AIMS: Although loop diuretics are the most commonly used drugs in acute heart failure (AHF) treatment, their short-term and long-term effects are relatively unknown. The significance of worsening renal function occurrence during intravenous treatment is not clear enough. This trial aims to clarify all these features and contemplate whether continuous infusion is better than an intermittent strategy in terms of decongestion efficacy, diuretic efficiency, renal function, and long-term prognosis. METHODS AND RESULTS: This is a prospective, multicentre, randomized study that compares continuous infusion to intermittent infusion and a low vs. high diuretic dose of furosemide in patients with a diagnosis of acute heart failure, BNP ≥ 100 pg/mL, and specific chest X-ray signs. Randomization criteria have been established at a 1:1 ratio using a computer-generated scheme of either twice-daily bolus injection or continuous infusion for a time period ranging from 72 to 120 h. The initial dose will be 80 mg/day of intravenous furosemide and, in the case of poor response, will be doubled using an escalation algorithm. A high diuretic dose is defined as a furosemide daily amount >120 mg/day respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Continuous and high dose groups could reveal a more intensive diuresis and a greater decongestion with respect to intermittent and low dose groups; high dose and poor loop diuretic efficiency should be related to increased diuretic resistance, renal dysfunction occurrence, and greater congestion status. Poor diuretic response will be associated with less decongestion and an adverse prognosis.