MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3183553506 · doi:10.1002/ehf2.13510

Use of Novel Non-Invasive Techniques and Biomarkers to Guide Outpatient Management of Fluid Overload and Reduce Hospital Readmission: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021· review· en· W3183553506 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Georgios Zisis, Amera Halabi, Quan Huynh, Christopher Neil, M. Carrington, Thomas H. Marwick

Bibliographic record

VenueESC Heart Failure · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemodynamic Monitoring and Therapy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMedical Research Future FundMedical Research CouncilNational Health and Medical Research CouncilNational Heart Foundation of Australia
KeywordsMedicineMeta-analysisIntensive care medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Aims Fluid congestion is a leading cause of hospital admission, readmission, and mortality in heart failure (HF). We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the effectiveness of an advanced fluid management programme (AFMP). The AFMP was defined as an intervention providing tailored diuretic therapy guided by intravascular volume assessment, in hospitalized patients or after discharge. The AFMP group was compared with patients who received standard care treatment. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the effectiveness of an AFMP in improving patient outcomes. Methods and results A systematic review of randomized controlled trials, case–control studies, and crossover studies using the terms ‘heart failure’, ‘fluid management’, and ‘readmission’ was conducted in PubMed, CINAHL, and Scopus up until November 2020. Studies reporting the association of an AFMP on readmission and/or mortality were included in our meta-analyses. Risk of bias was assessed in non-randomized studies using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale. From 232 retrieved studies, 12 were included in the data synthesis. The 6040 patients in the included studies had a mean age of 72 ± 4 years and mean left ventricular ejection fraction of 39 ± 8%, there were slightly more men (n = 3022) than women, and the follow-up period was a mean of 4.8 ± 3.1 months. Readmission data were available in 5362 patients; of these, 1629 were readmitted. Mortality data were available in 5787 patients; of these, 584 died. HF patients who had an AFMP in hospital and/or after discharge had lower odds of all-cause readmission (odds ratio—OR 0.64 [95% confidence interval—CI 0.44, 0.92], P = 0.02) with moderate heterogeneity (I2 = 46.5) and lower odds of all-cause mortality (OR 0.82 [95% CI 0.69, 0.98], P = 0.03) with low heterogeneity (I2 = 0). The use of an AFMP was equally effective in reducing readmission and mortality regardless of age and follow-up duration. Effective pre-discharge diuresis was associated with significantly lower readmission odds (OR 0.43 [95% CI 0.26, 0.71], P = 0.001) compared with a fluid management plan as part of post-discharge follow-up. Conclusions An effective AFMP is associated with improving readmission and mortality in HF. Our results encourage attainment of optimal volume status at discharge and prescription of optimal diuretic dose. Ongoing support to maintain euvolaemia and effective collaboration between healthcare teams, along with effective patient education and engagement, may help to reduce adverse outcomes in HF patients.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.619
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.067
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.295 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueESC Heart FailureSame topicHemodynamic Monitoring and TherapyFrench-language works237,207