Trial reportESC heart failure2026
The effect of a change in fluid intake advice on outcomes in chronic heart failure: a prespecified subanalysis of the FRESH-UP study.
Trial report in ESC heart failure, 2026. 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. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsThe Fluid REStriction in Heart failure versus liberal fluid UPtake (FRESH-UP) study (NCT04551729) randomized patients with chronic heart failure (HF) to liberal fluid intake (LFI) vs fluid restriction (FR). Pre-trial fluid management may have impacted trial outcomes.
methodsThe open-label FRESH-UP study randomized 504 patients with chronic HF to an advice of LFI or FR of 1500 ml/day. Primary outcome was the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Overall Summary Score (KCCQ-OSS) after 3 months adjusted for baseline. Key secondary outcome was thirst distress. Patient-reported fluid intake was assessed at Week 6. Safety outcomes included death and hospitalizations. For this subanalysis, participants were stratified according to pre-trial fluid management (FR or LFI).
resultsPrior to randomization, 269 (53.4%) patients adhered to FR and 235 (46.6%) adhered to LFI. After 3 month follow-up, KCCQ-OSS was significantly different between groups (P = .035): in patients changing from pre-trial FR to LFI, KCCQ-OSS was 74.7 [95% confidence interval (CI) 71.2-78.3] compared to 70.2 (95% CI 66.3-74.2) in those with the reversed scenario. In the latter group, thirst distress increased the most. Patient-reported fluid intake was significantly higher in patients randomized to LFI when compared to FR (P = .019), regardless of pre-trial FR or LFI (1771 and 1757 ml, vs 1486 and 1464 ml, respectively). Safety outcomes did not differ.
conclusionsThese analyses add understanding to the effects of fluid intake management in chronic HF and expose a signal of potential harm of FR in patients with pre-trial LFI and a potential benefit of LFI in patients with pre-trial FR. These results corroborate with the primary results and support that there is no need to routinely initiate or continue FR in stable patients with chronic HF.
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.