SynthesisCritical care (London, England)2025
Protocolized natriuresis-guided diuretic therapy in acute heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Critical care (London, England), 2025. 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.
- Cardiorenal Syndrome Type 1 in Patients with Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Novel blood biomarkers for heart failure mortality: mechanistic pathways, aging biology, and risk stratification.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
- Advances in Cardiorenal Medicine: The Year 2025 in Review.Cardiorenal medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVolume overload is the primary pathophysiological mechanism underlying signs and symptoms in acute heart failure (AHF). However, evidence-based strategies for optimal loop diuretic dosing and monitoring remain limited. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of natriuresis-guided protocols for titrating diuretic therapy in patients with AHF.
methodsWe searched Cochrane, PubMed, and Embase databases for studies that compared natriuresis-guided diuretic therapy versus standard management in patients with AHF from their inception until June 2025. We computed pooled risk ratio (RR) for binary outcomes, and for continuous outcomes, we calculated either pooled mean difference (MD) or geometric mean ratio (GMR) derived from differences in log-means, all with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Data from the studies were pooled using R version 4.4.1. Risk of bias was assessed using RoB 2 and ROBINS-I tools. We also performed a sensitivity analysis restricted to randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
resultsThree RCTs and two observational studies were included, encompassing 933 patients, of which 404 (43%) were in the natriuresis-guided therapy group. Protocolized therapy significantly increased natriuresis (GMR: 1.30; 95% CI: 1.14 to 1.49) and diuresis (GMR: 1.21; 95% CI: 1.09 to 1.35) after 48 h. No significant differences were observed in weight loss, length of hospital stay, heart failure rehospitalization, or all-cause mortality. Protocolized therapy was associated with a lower risk of doubling serum creatinine (RR: 0.52; 95% CI: 0.28 to 0.98), without increasing the risk of hypokalemia or hypotension. Two RCTs were deemed at "low" risk of bias by the RoB 2 tool, while Bayat et al. was rated as having "some concerns." For studies assessed using the ROBINS-I tool, the ENACT-HF study presented a "moderate" risk of bias, and Pellegrino et al. a "serious" risk. Nevertheless, our sensitivity analysis, limited to RCTs, confirmed our findings for all efficacy and safety endpoints.
conclusionIn this meta-analysis of patients with AHF, protocolized natriuresis-guided therapy was safe and associated with improved diuresis and natriuresis after 48 h, as well as a reduced risk of acute kidney injury. While the short-term safety and efficacy are promising, further large RCTs are needed to evaluate the effects on clinical endpoints in diverse healthcare settings and patients worldwide.
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.