4.5 Article

Nutrition, Obesity, and Cachexia in Patients With Heart Failure: A Consensus Statement from the Heart Failure Society of America Scientific Statements Committee

期刊

JOURNAL OF CARDIAC FAILURE
卷 25, 期 5, 页码 380-400

出版社

CHURCHILL LIVINGSTONE INC MEDICAL PUBLISHERS
DOI: 10.1016/j.cardfail.2019.03.007

关键词

Heart failure; nutrition; obesity; cachexia; metabolism

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Dietary guidance for patients with heart failure (HF) has traditionally focused on sodium and fluid intake restriction, but dietary quality is frequently poor in patients with HF and may contribute to morbidity and mortality. Restrictive diets can lead to inadequate intake of macronutrients and micronutrients by patients with HF, with the potential for deficiencies of calcium, magnesium, zinc, iron, thiamine, vitamins D, E, and K, and folate. Although inadequate intake and low plasma levels of micronutrients have been associated with adverse clinical outcomes, evidence supporting therapeutic repletion is limited. Intravenous iron, thiamine, and coenzyme Q10 have the most clinical trial data for supplementation. There is also limited evidence supporting protein intake goals. Obesity is a risk factor for incident HF, and weight loss is an established approach for preventing HF, with a role for bariatric surgery in patients with severe obesity. However weight loss for patients with existing HF and obesity is a more controversial topic owing to an obesity survival paradox. Dietary interventions and pharmacologic weight loss therapies are understudied in HF populations. There are also limited data for optimal strategies to identify and address cachexia and sarcopenia in patients with HF, with at least 10%-20% of patients with ambulatory systolic HE developing clinically significant wasting. Gaps in our knowledge about nutrition status in patients with HF are outlined in this Statement, and strategies to address the most clinically relevant questions are proposed.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据