ArticleHealth science reports2021
Intravenous furosemide vs nebulized furosemide in patients with pulmonary edema: A randomized controlled trial.
Article in Health science reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Nebuliser therapy in critical care: The past, present and future.Journal of the Intensive Care Society · 2024Review
- Intravenous furosemide vs nebulized furosemide in patients with pulmonary edema: A randomized controlled trial.Health science reports · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsPulmonary edema is one of the most common acute respiratory disorders that diagnosis and treatment of the disease still remain as a health problem. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of intravenous furosemide and nebulized furosemide in control of the symptoms of the patients with pulmonary edem.
methodsIn this clinical trial, 80 patients were enrolled with pulmonary edema. Patients were randomly divided into two groups. In the intervention group the patients received nebulized furosemide at a dose of 1 mg furosemide for 20 minutes in 2 mL of sodium chloride 0.9% and in the control group the patients received intravenous furosemide at a dose of 1 mg/kg. Then, hemodynamic parameters and estimation of the clinical severity of the pulmonary edema in both groups was performed for 2 hours.
resultsAccording to our results, we can say that nebulized furosemide is not superior to intravenous furosemide in reducing dyspnea and crackles in patients with acute pulmonary edema, but significantly improved respiratory rate and arterial blood oxygen and has less hemodynamic changes than the intravenous furosemide.
conclusionsThe results of this study showed the beneficial effects of nebulized furosemide in the treatment of pulmonary edema, which can be prescribed as a treatment in addition to standard treatment and significantly lead in better control of pulmonary edema in the short term.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.