ReviewJournal of personalized medicine2024
Fluid Restriction for Patients with Heart Failure: Current Evidence and Future Perspectives.
Review in Journal of personalized medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of outcomes between robot-assisted and laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery in patients with heart failure: a national readmission database analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Thirst in End-Stage Liver Disease: From Symptom Disregard to a Multidisciplinary Clinical Pathway and Future Perspectives: A Narrative Review.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2026Review
- Fluid management among outpatients with chronic heart failure: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- Safety and Efficacy of Salt Restriction Across the Spectrum of Heart Failure.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2025Review
- Integrating and Simplifying Evidence to Optimize Cardiorenal Guideline-Directed Therapies.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Status of anxiety and depression among chronic heart failure patients: Factors influencing poor fluid restriction adherence.World journal of psychiatry · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Fluid restriction has long been believed to benefit patients with heart failure by counteracting the activated renin-angiotensin aldosterone system and sympathetic nervous activity. However, its effectiveness remains controversial. In this paper, we summarized the current recommendations and reviewed the scientific evidence on fluid restriction in the setting of both acute decompensated heart failure and compensated heart failure. While a recent meta-analysis demonstrated the beneficial effects of fluid restriction on both all-cause mortality and hospitalization compared to usual care, several weaknesses were identified in the assessment of the methodological quality of the meta-analysis using AMSTAR 2. Further randomized controlled trials with larger sample sizes are needed to elucidate the benefits of fluid restriction for both clinical outcomes and patient-reported outcomes in patients with heart failure.
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.