What dietary interventions have been tested in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction? A systematic scoping review.
View / Open Files
Authors
Mulrennan, Sandra
Publication Date
2023-03-01Journal Title
Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs
ISSN
1474-5151
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Type
Article
This Version
AM
Metadata
Show full item recordCitation
Forsyth, F., Mulrennan, S., Burt, J., Hartley, P., Kuhn, I., Lin, H., Mant, J., et al. (2023). What dietary interventions have been tested in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction? A systematic scoping review.. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs https://doi.org/10.1093/eurjcn/zvac062
Description
Aim: To determine what dietary interventions have been tested in HFpEF, the modulation method and outcomes employed and to summarise any evidence for benefit.
Methods and Results: We performed key word searches in five bibliographic databases from 2001 to 2021, to identify randomised or experimental dietary interventions tested in HFpEF or mixed HF samples. Study characteristics were summarised according to PICO (population, intervention, comparator, outcome) categories and intervention complexity was assessed Twenty-five clinical investigations were retrieved; only ten (40%) were conducted exclusively in HFpEF; the remainder enrolled mixed HF samples. Most studies employed either highly tailored prescribed diets (n=12, 48%) or dietary supplementation (n=10, 40%) modalities. Dietary pattern interventions (n=3, 12%) are less well represented in the literature.
Abstract
AIMS: To determine what dietary interventions have been tested in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), the modulation method, and outcomes employed and to summarize any evidence for benefit. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed key word searches in five bibliographic databases from 2001 to 2021, to identify randomized or experimental dietary interventions tested in HFpEF or mixed heart failure (HF) samples. Study characteristics were summarized according to population, intervention, comparator, outcome categories and intervention complexity was assessed. Twenty-five clinical investigations were retrieved; only 10 (40%) were conducted exclusively in HFpEF; the remainder enrolled mixed HF samples. Most studies employed either highly tailored prescribed diets (n = 12, 48%) or dietary supplementation (n = 10, 40%) modalities. Dietary pattern interventions (n = 3, 12%) are less well represented in the literature. CONCLUSION: Heterogeneity made pooling studies challenging. Better reporting of baseline characteristics and the use of standardized HF lexicon would ensure greater confidence in interpretation of studies involving mixed HF populations. The field would benefit greatly from explicit reporting of the biological mechanism of action (e.g. the causal pathway) that an intervention is designed to modulate so that studies can be synthesized via their underlying mechanism of action by which diet may affect HF. An extension of the current set of core outcomes proposed by the European Society of Cardiology Heart Failure Association would ensure dietary clinical endpoints are more consistently defined and measured. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO: CRD42019145388.
Keywords
HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), Heart failure, Humans, Heart Failure, Stroke Volume, Cardiology, Prognosis
Sponsorship
Evelyn Trust, Bart's Charity
Funder references
Evelyn Trust (21/15)
Embargo Lift Date
2023-07-11
Identifiers
External DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/eurjcn/zvac062
This record's URL: https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/338840
Statistics
Total file downloads (since January 2020). For more information on metrics see the
IRUS guide.
Recommended or similar items
The current recommendation prototype on the Apollo Repository will be turned off on 03 February 2023. Although the pilot has been fruitful for both parties, the service provider IKVA is focusing on horizon scanning products and so the recommender service can no longer be supported. We recognise the importance of recommender services in supporting research discovery and are evaluating offerings from other service providers. If you would like to offer feedback on this decision please contact us on: support@repository.cam.ac.uk