Trial reportNature medicine2025
Liberal fluid intake versus fluid restriction in chronic heart failure: a randomized clinical trial.
Trial report in Nature medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04551729 (Fluid Restriction in Heart Failure Versus Liberal Fluid Uptake), which is not on this map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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.
Fluid Restriction in Heart Failure Versus Liberal Fluid Uptake
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Optimal fluid management strategies in patients with heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Pooled it
- The effect of a change in fluid intake advice on outcomes in chronic heart failure: a prespecified subanalysis of the FRESH-UP study.ESC heart failure · 2026Trial
- Thirst in Patients With Advanced Chronic Heart Failure Waiting for a Heart Transplantation: A Mixed Methods Study of Patients' and Nurses' Experiences.Nursing in critical care · 2026Article
- Current status and global trends in self-care among patients with heart failure: challenges and opportunities.The journal of cardiovascular aging · 2026Article
- Advances in Clinical Cardiology 2025: A Summary of Key Clinical Trials.Advances in therapy · 2026Review
- Update on clinical heart failure trials.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2026Review
- [Update on the pharmacotherapy of chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: from four to six pillars?]Innere Medizin (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- Correlation analysis of serum PACAP-38, fibulin-3 and TEM1 levels with cardiac function and prognosis in chronic heart failure patients.Journal of medical biochemistry · 2026Article
- Review
- Malnutrition and Cachexia in Inpatients With Acute Cardiac Conditions: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation · 2026Review
- Hyponatraemia in heart failure: a mechanistic approach to contemporary management.Heart failure reviews · 2026Review
- 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
- Multidimensional and Multidisciplinary Management of Heart Failure Patients with Frailty.Cardiac failure review · 2026Review
- Cardiorenal Syndrome in the Elderly: Challenges and Considerations.Geriatrics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Decongestion in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease coexisting with heart failure.Clinical kidney journal · 2025Review
- The first 24-h negative fluid balance is related to lower short-term mortality but higher AKI progression in critically ill heart failure: a retrospective cohort study.Therapeutic advances in cardiovascular diseaseArticle
- iCARDIO Alliance Global Implementation Guidelines on Heart Failure 2025.Heart views : the official journal of the Gulf Heart AssociationArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Fluid restriction is frequently recommended to patients with chronic heart failure, but randomized clinical trials assessing the effects of fluid restriction remain scarce. In this multicenter open-label trial, outpatients with chronic heart failure were randomized to receiving advice for liberal fluid intake versus receiving advice for fluid restriction, up to 1,500 ml per day of fluid intake. The primary outcome of the trial was health status after 3 months, as assessed by the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Overall Summary Score (KCCQ-OSS). Secondary outcomes included thirst distress and safety events. Among 504 randomized patients (67.3% male), the KCCQ-OSS after 3 months was 74.0 in the liberal fluid intake group versus 72.2 in the fluid restriction group, with a mean difference after adjustment for baseline scores of 2.17 (95% confidence interval -0.06 to 4.39; P = 0.06), indicating that the primary outcome was not met. Thirst distress was higher in the fluid restriction group and no differences were observed for safety events between the two groups. These findings question the benefit of fluid restriction in chronic heart failure. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT04551729 .
Indexed as
Identifiers
40159556What 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.