Data Entry: Please note that the research database will be replaced by UNIverse by the end of October 2023. Please enter your data into the system https://universe-intern.unibas.ch. Thanks
Prospective comparison of noninvasive, bedside ultrasound methods for assessing central venous pressure
Journal
Ultraschall in der Medizin
Volume
33
Number
7
Pages / Article-Number
E256-62
Abstract
To prospectively evaluate the accuracy of noninvasive central venous pressure (CVP) assessment by compression ultrasound of a forearm vein (CUS), inferior vena cava (IVC-C) and internal jugular vein collapsibility (IJV-C) compared to invasive CVP measurement (invCVP) as the gold standard.; CUS, IVC-C and IJV-C were performed in a random sequence in 81 consecutive intensive care patients with simultaneous invCVP monitoring. Examiners were blinded to invCVP and previous examinations.; Median invCVP was 12.0 mmHg (range 1 - 23). CUS, IVC-C and IJV-C could be obtained in 89 %, 95 % and 100 % of cases, respectively, within a median time of 188 sec [IQR 125; 270], 133 sec [IQR 100; 211] and 60 sec [IQR 50; 109], respectively. The Spearman correlation coefficient between invCVP and CUS, IVC-C, and IJV-C was 0.485 95 %-CI [0.25; 0.65], -0.186 [-0.42; 0.07], and -0.408 [-0.59; -0.18], respectively. The median absolute difference between CUS and invCVP was 3 mmHg [IQR 2; 6.75]. CVP was categorized as low ( 0.6), normal (7 - 12 mmHg; collapsibility 0.6 - 0.2) and high (< 12 mmHg; collapsibility 0.10 for all pair-wise comparisons).; The overall ability of CUS, IVC-C and IJV-C to assess invCVP was only moderate. CUS seems to be the preferable method if absolute CVP values are needed. IJV-C seems to be the fastest and most easily acquirable method, and thus may be especially valuable in emergency rooms.
