Abstract
BACKGROUND The clinical efficacy of furosemide administration in preventing contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN) remains uncertain. This meta-analysis was designed to update data on the incidence of CIN with additional furosemide treatment beyond saline hydration in comparison with hydration alone in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). MATERIAL/METHODS A computerized literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases was performed. Trials were eligible if they enrolled patients undergoing coronary angiography and randomly allocated participants to receive furosemide administration in addition to saline hydration or saline hydration alone. We calculated odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for combinations of studies. RESULTS Five trials involving 1294 patients (640 for additional furosemide treatment and 654 for hydration alone) were included in the meta-analysis. In the synthesis of data, additional furosemide administration had little impact on the incidence of CIN post-PCI compared with peri-procedural saline hydration alone (OR=0.96; 95% CI 0.33-2.84, p=0.95). Moreover, as for the subsequent need for dialysis, there was no statistical significant difference between the 2 groups (OR=1.01; 95% CI 0.38-2.67, p=0.99). Sensitivity analyses did not show any relevant influence on the overall results. There was no publication bias in the meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS Furosemide administration did not achieve additional benefit beyond saline hydration in reducing the incidence of CIN in patients undergoing PCI.
