These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Extracorporeal ultrafiltration vs. conventional diuretic therapy in advanced decompensated heart failure.
    Author: Hanna MA, Tang WH, Teo BW, O'Neill JO, Weinstein DM, Lau SM, Van Lente F, Starling RC, Paganini EP, Taylor DO.
    Journal: Congest Heart Fail; 2012; 18(1):54-63. PubMed ID: 22277179.
    Abstract:
    Compared with conventional diuretic (CD) therapy, ultrafiltration (UF) is associated with greater weight loss and fewer re-hospitalizations in patients admitted with decompensated heart failure (HF). Concerns have been raised regarding its safety and efficacy in patients with more advanced heart failure. The authors conducted a single-center, prospective, randomized controlled trial in patients with advanced HF admitted to an intensive care unit for hemodynamically guided therapy, comparing UF (n=17) with CD (n=19) at admission. The primary end point was the time required for pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP) to be maintained at a value of ≤18 mm Hg for at least 4 consecutive hours. Secondary end points included levels of cytokines and neurohormones, as well as several clinical outcomes. In our study cohort, the time to achieve the primary end point was lower in the UF group but did not reach statistical significance (P = .08). UF resulted in greater weight reduction, higher total volume removed, and shorter hospital length of stay. There were no differences in kidney function, biomarkers, or adverse events. In patients with advanced HF under hemodynamically tailored therapy, UF can be safely performed to achieve higher average volume removed than CD therapy without leading to adverse outcomes.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]