Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 12, 2026

Bedside Ultrasound for Guiding Fluid Removal in Patients with Pulmonary Edema: The Reverse-FALLS Protocol
Published on: July 28, 2018
Liberal fluid intake versus fluid restriction in chronic heart failure: a randomized clinical trial
Job J Herrmann1,2, Hans-Peter Brunner-La Rocca3,4, Lisette E H J M Baltussen1
1Department of Cardiology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Insights
Fluid restriction in chronic heart failure patients did not improve health status compared to liberal fluid intake. Patients advised to restrict fluids experienced higher thirst distress without significant health benefits.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Clinical Trials
- Patient Outcomes
Background:
- Fluid restriction is a common recommendation for chronic heart failure (CHF) management.
- However, robust clinical evidence from randomized trials supporting this practice is limited.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the impact of fluid restriction versus liberal fluid intake on health status in patients with chronic heart failure.
Main Methods:
- A multicenter, open-label trial randomized 504 outpatients with CHF.
- Intervention groups received advice for either liberal fluid intake or restriction (up to 1,500 ml/day).
- The primary outcome was health status assessed by the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Overall Summary Score (KCCQ-OSS) at 3 months.
Main Results:
- No significant difference in KCCQ-OSS was observed between groups (74.0 liberal vs. 72.2 restricted; P=0.06).
- Thirst distress was significantly higher in the fluid restriction group.
- No differences in safety events were noted between the liberal and restricted fluid intake groups.
Conclusions:
- The study questions the clinical benefit of routine fluid restriction in patients with chronic heart failure.
- Liberal fluid intake appears to be a safe alternative, with potentially better patient comfort regarding thirst.
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 .
Related Concept Videos
Heart Failure Drugs: Diuretics
Mitral Regurgitation IV: Nursing Management
Heart Failure III: Clinical Manifestations
Heart Failure V: Medical Management
Heart Failure VI: Adjunct Therapies
Heart Failure VII: Nursing Interventions

