Diuretic effects of furosemide infusion versus bolus injection in congestive heart failure

Abstract

In a randomized, single-blind, crossover clinical trial, the diuretic efficacy of the same total dose of furosemide (2 x 40 mg) administered in either conventional intravenous bolus injection or continuous infusion was studied in 20 patients (nine males and 11 females), aged 37-75 years, with congestive heart failure. Furosemide infusion, administered first, produced a significantly greater diuresis than the bolus when compared with baseline (86%: 29.6%; p = 0.029). This was followed by a similar increase in 24-h urinary sodium, potassium and chloride excretion, with no significant difference from the bolus effect. The following day, diuretic and saluretic effects of furosemide did not differ significantly between the study groups. Nevertheless, when continuous furosemide infusion was administered first, it produced a greater increase in urinary volume, 24-h urinary sodium, potassium and chloride than when bolus injection was applied the next day. Conversely, when furosemide bolus was administered first, followed by the infusions the next day, the effects were almost equal, regardless of the mode of administration. It is concluded that in the treatment of refractory edema in patients with congestive heart failure, continuous intravenous infusion of furosemide is superior to the conventional intermittent bolus injection, especially if it is administered at the very beginning of the hospital treatment, and presumably is even better with higher dosage and longer infusion time span.