Previously submitted to: JMIR Research Protocols (no longer under consideration since Nov 13, 2025)
Date Submitted: Aug 25, 2025
Open Peer Review Period: Aug 26, 2025 - Oct 21, 2025
(closed for review but you can still tweet)
NOTE: This is an unreviewed Preprint
Warning: This is a unreviewed preprint (What is a preprint?). Readers are warned that the document has not been peer-reviewed by expert/patient reviewers or an academic editor, may contain misleading claims, and is likely to undergo changes before final publication, if accepted, or may have been rejected/withdrawn (a note "no longer under consideration" will appear above).
Peer review me: Readers with interest and expertise are encouraged to sign up as peer-reviewer, if the paper is within an open peer-review period (in this case, a "Peer Review Me" button to sign up as reviewer is displayed above). All preprints currently open for review are listed here. Outside of the formal open peer-review period we encourage you to tweet about the preprint.
Citation: Please cite this preprint only for review purposes or for grant applications and CVs (if you are the author).
Final version: If our system detects a final peer-reviewed "version of record" (VoR) published in any journal, a link to that VoR will appear below. Readers are then encourage to cite the VoR instead of this preprint.
Settings: If you are the author, you can login and change the preprint display settings, but the preprint URL/DOI is supposed to be stable and citable, so it should not be removed once posted.
Submit: To post your own preprint, simply submit to any JMIR journal, and choose the appropriate settings to expose your submitted version as preprint.
Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.
Biomarker-Guided Versus Clinically Guided Fluid Management in Heart Failure: A Protocol for a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
ABSTRACT
Background:
Fluid overload in heart failure (HF) remains a critical driver of morbidity and mortality. Current guideline-directed fluid management strategies based on clinical signs and symptoms lack sensitivity for the early detection of congestion. This limitation often leads to delayed interventions or suboptimal fluid removal, contributing to high rates of rehospitalization and poor patient outcomes. Biomarker-guided strategies, particularly using B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) or N-terminal pro-BNP (NT-proBNP), offer a potential solution by providing objective, real-time feedback on hemodynamic stress.
Objective:
This study aims to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of biomarker-guided fluid management compared to standard, clinically guided strategies in patients with HF. The primary objectives are to determine whether a biomarker-guided approach reduces all-cause mortality and HF-related hospitalizations. Secondary objectives include assessing the impact on renal function, quality of life, and changes in biomarker levels.
Methods:
We will conduct a systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Web of Science from their inception to May 2025. We will include randomized controlled trials and prospective cohort studies that compare fluid management guided by BNP or NT-proBNP to clinically guided standard care in adult patients with HF. Two investigators will independently perform study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 (RoB 2) and the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tools. The primary outcomes are all-cause mortality and HF-related hospitalizations. Secondary outcomes include worsening renal function, quality of life measured by validated questionnaires, and biomarker trajectory. Statistical analysis will be performed using RevMan 5.4. We will use a random-effects model for meta-analysis and conduct subgroup analyses based on HF phenotype (eg, reduced vs preserved ejection fraction) and biomarker type.
Results:
This study will synthesize the available evidence on the efficacy and safety of biomarker-guided fluid management in HF. The findings, based on outcomes such as mortality, hospitalization rates, renal function, and quality of life, will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.
Conclusions:
This systematic review will consolidate the current evidence for biomarker-guided fluid management in HF. The findings are expected to inform clinical guidelines and decision-making by providing a comprehensive assessment of the benefits and risks of this approach. Furthermore, this review will identify existing research gaps and suggest directions for future investigations to optimize fluid management strategies in this vulnerable patient population. Clinical Trial: PROSPERO CRD420250652134; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420250652134
Citation
The author of this paper has made a PDF available, but requires the user to login, or create an account.
Copyright
© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.