Loop diuretics continue to be a crucial component of pharmacological treatment, to eliminate extra fluid and enhance symptom control in acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF). Understanding the loop diuretics' more efficient form of administration would be very beneficial in improving the management of people's ADHF, resulting in a quicker resolution of symptoms and a notable decrease in morbidity. To assess the outcomes of intravenous continuous infusion with bolus injection of loop diuretics for patients with ADHF, this meta-analysis was carried out. The current meta-analysis was conducted as per the Cochrane Collaboration guidelines and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis extension (PRISMA) guidelines. A search was carried out on PubMed and EMBASE databases for studies comparing continuous infusion with intermittent bolus injection of furosemide in patients with congestive heart failure without restriction on the language of publication from 1 January 2001 to 31 July 2022. The primary outcome of the meta-analysis was all-cause mortality and loss of body weight (kg). Pre-defined secondary outcomes included length of hospital stay (LOS) in days, brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) reduction (pg/ml), number of patients with hypokalemia, and urine output at 24 hours (ml). A total of nine articles were included in this meta-analysis enrolling 713 patients. No significant difference was reported between patients who received intermittent bolus injections and continuous infusion of furosemide in regards to all-cause mortality, LOS, total urine output, the incidence of hypokalemia, and change in BNP. However, the reduction of body weight was greater in the continuous infusion group compared to bolus administration. In conclusion, in the current meta-analysis of nine randomized controlled trials (RCTs), continuous infusion of furosemide seemed to have a greater reduction of body weight. However, no significant difference was there in 24-hrs urine output. However, we cannot conclude that intravenous continuous infusion has a better diuretic effect compared to bolus administration.

It is still uncertain whether patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and stable coronary artery disease (CAD) who require long-term oral anticoagulation (OAC) should also receive antiplatelet treatment (APT). This meta-analysis aims to compare the efficacy and safety of OAC alone with OAC plus APT in individuals with AF and stable CAD. The current meta-analysis was conducted as per the guidelines of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE). We performed electronic searches using PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library. The efficacy outcomes assessed in this meta-analysis included cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke (ischemic and hemorrhagic), and all-cause mortality. The safety outcome included major bleeding events. A total of five studies were included in the current meta-analysis enrolling 9199 patients with stable CAD and AF. Out of these five studies, three were observational and two were randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Our study showed no significant difference between two groups in the incidence of cardiovascular mortality (Hazard ratio {HR}: 0.