• Int Heart J · Jan 2015

    Review Meta Analysis

    Liberal versus restricted fluid administration in heart failure patients. A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials.

    • Yang Li, Biao Fu, and Xiaoxian Qian.
    • Division of Dermatology, Xinqiao Hospital, Third Military Medical University.
    • Int Heart J. 2015 Jan 1;56(2):192-5.

    AbstractRestrictive fluid intake is recommended, in addition to standard pharmacologic treatment, in the treatment of patients with chronic heart failure (CHF). However, this recommendation lacks firm scientific evidence. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of published randomized controlled trials to estimate the effect of fluid restriction in patients with heart failure.Randomized controlled trials were identified in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases using the search-keywords "fluid" and "heart failure". Outcomes were compared in heart failure patients with liberal and restricted fluid intake. Pooled risk ratios (RR) and weighted mean differences (WMD) were calculated using random effects models. Studies focusing on decompensated heart failure were analyzed separately.Six small randomized trials comparing liberal and restricted fluid intake met the inclusion criteria. Significant heterogeneity was noted in the reported studies for several outcomes. There were no differences in readmission rate (5 studies, pooled RR = 1.32; 95% CI: 0.86 to 2.01; P = 0.2), mortality rate (5 studies, pooled RR = 1.50; 95% CI: 0.87 to 2.57; P = 0.14), perceived thirst (4 studies, WMD = -0.7; 95% CI: -2.58 to 1.17; P = 0.46), duration of intravenous diuretics (2 studies, WMD = 0.17; 95% CI: -1.26 to 1.6; P = 0.81) or serum sodium levels (WMD = -1.61; 95% CI: -3.28 to 0.07; P = 0.06) between the liberal fluid intake group and the restrictive fluid intake group. Mean serum creatinine and BNP levels were significantly higher in the liberal fluid group: WMD 0.20 (95% CI: 0.15 to 0.25; P < 0.00001) and 172.59 (95% CI: 67.38 to 277.8; P = 0.001), respectively. There was no difference in any of the outcomes after correcting for heterogeneity.While studies to date are limited by heterogeneity and small sample sizes, the combined data suggest similar clinical outcomes in patients with CHF managed with liberal and restrictive fluid intake. Larger studies are needed to confirm our findings.

      Pubmed     Free full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…