Goal‐directed fluid removal with furosemide versus placebo in intensive care patients with fluid overload: A randomised, blinded trial (GODIF trial—First version)
Primary resultResult — go to the resultMean difference 1 day 95% CI −19 to 21- terminated early
Authors' conclusion
The use of cumulative fluid balance as the only estimate of fluid status appeared too difficult to use in clinical practice. We were unable to provide precise estimates for any outcomes as only 4.1% of the planned sample size was randomised.
Study context
- Population
- Clinically stable adult intensive care unit (ICU) patients with at least 5% fluid overloadof 1000 planned
- Participants
- 41 patients
- Comparison
- Goal-directed fluid removal with furosemide vs placebo infusion
- Primary endpoint
- Days alive and out of hospital
- Follow-up
- 90 days
Methodological detailsmulticentre, stratified, parallel-group, blinded, placebo-controlled, Terminated after 41 of 1000 participants: clinicians had difficulty using cumulative fluid balance as the only estimate of fluid status (32% had initial balance adjusted; 29% had ≥1 protocol violation)
- Multicentre
- Stratified
- Parallel-group
- Blinded
- Placebo-controlled
- Terminated after 41 of 1000 participants: clinicians had difficulty using cumulative fluid balance as the only estimate of fluid status (32% had initial balance adjusted; 29% had ≥1 protocol violation)
Primary result
As reported in the abstract
Mean difference
1 day
95% CI −19 to 21
p-value .94
By group
Furosemide vs Placebo
mean difference 1 day (95% CI −19 to 21); p-value .94
Further findings
Cumulative fluid balance · baseline
Cumulative fluid balance · day three
Original publication
Goal‐directed fluid removal with furosemide versus placebo in intensive care patients with fluid overload: A randomised, blinded trial (GODIF trial—First version). Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. Published 25 January 2023. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →