Inferior Vena Cava Measurement with Ultrasound: What Is the Best View and Best Mode?

被引:65
|
作者
Finnerty, Nathan M. [1 ]
Panchal, Ashish R. [1 ]
Boulger, Creagh [1 ]
Vira, Amar [1 ]
Bischof, Jason J. [1 ]
Amick, Christopher [1 ]
Amick, Christopher [1 ]
Way, David P. [1 ]
Bahner, David P. [1 ]
机构
[1] Ohio State Univ, Coll Med, Dept Emergency Med, 750 Prior Hall,376 W 10th Ave, Columbus, OH 43210 USA
关键词
RIGHT ATRIAL PRESSURE; EMERGENCY-DEPARTMENT PATIENTS; CRITICALLY-ILL PATIENTS; SONOGRAPHIC MEASUREMENT; RESPIRATORY VARIATION; INTERRATER RELIABILITY; FLUID RESPONSIVENESS; HEALTHY-VOLUNTEERS; TRAUMA PATIENTS; VOLUME STATUS;
D O I
10.5811/westjem.2016.12.32489
中图分类号
R4 [临床医学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100602 ;
摘要
Introduction: Intravascular volume status is an important clinical consideration in the management of the critically ill. Point-of-care ultrasonography (POCUS) has gained popularity as a non-invasive means of intravascular volume assessment via examination of the inferior vena cava (IVC). However, there are limited data comparing different acquisition techniques for IVC measurement by POCUS. The goal of this evaluation was to determine the reliability of three IVC acquisition techniques for volume assessment: subxiphoid transabdominal long axis (LA), transabdominal short axis (SA), and right lateral transabdominal coronal long axis (CLA) (aka "rescue view"). Methods: Volunteers were evaluated by three experienced emergency physician sonographers (EP). Gray scale (B-mode) and motion-mode (M-mode) diameters were measured and IVC collapsibility index (IVCCI) calculated for three anatomic views (LA, SA, CLA). For each IVC measurement, we calculated descriptive statistics, intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC), and two-way univariate analyses of variance. Results: EPs evaluated 39 volunteers, yielding 351 total US measurements. Measurements of the three views had similar means (LA 1.9 +/- 0.4cm; SA 1.9 +/- 0.4cm; CLA 2.0 +/- 0.5cm). For B-Mode, LA had the highest ICC (0.86, 95% CI [0.76-0.92]) while CLA had the poorest ICC (0.74, 95% CI [0.56-0.85]). ICCs for all M-mode IVCCI were low. Significant interaction effects between anatomical view and EP were observed for B-mode and M-mode measurements. Post-hoc analyses revealed difficulty in consistent view acquisition between EPs. Conclusion: Inter-rater reliability of the IVC by EPs was highest for B-mode LA and poorest for all M-Mode IVC collapsibility indices (IVCCI). These results suggest that B-mode LA holds the most promise to deliver reliable measures of IVC diameter. Future studies may focus on validation in a clinical setting as well as comparison to a reference standard.
引用
收藏
页码:496 / 501
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Inferior vena cava filters: current best practices
    Rajasekhar, Anita
    JOURNAL OF THROMBOSIS AND THROMBOLYSIS, 2015, 39 (03) : 315 - 327
  • [2] Inferior vena cava filters: current best practices
    Anita Rajasekhar
    Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis, 2015, 39 : 315 - 327
  • [3] Erratum to: Inferior vena cava filters: current best practices
    Anita Rajasekhar
    Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis, 2015, 40 : 260 - 260
  • [4] The role of inferior vena cava diameter in volume status monitoring; the best sonographic measurement method?
    Yamanoglu, Nalan Gokce Celebi
    Yamanoglu, Adnan
    Parlak, Ismet
    Pinar, Pelin
    Tosun, Ali
    Erkuran, Burak
    Aydinok, Gizem
    Torlak, Fatih
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2015, 33 (03): : 433 - 438
  • [5] The value of the inferior vena cava ultrasound in the decision to hospitalise in patients with acute decompensated heart failure; the best sonographic measurement method?
    Yamanoglu, Adnan
    Celebi Yamanoglu, Nalan Gokce
    Ozturk, Semi
    Cakmak, Sumeyye
    Akay, Serhat
    Akyol, Pinar Yesim
    Sogut, Ozgur
    ACTA CARDIOLOGICA, 2021, 76 (03) : 245 - 257
  • [6] Inferior Vena Cava Filters: Guidelines, Best Practice, and Expanding Indications
    DeYoung, Elliot
    Minocha, Jeet
    SEMINARS IN INTERVENTIONAL RADIOLOGY, 2016, 33 (02) : 65 - 70
  • [7] Absolute indications and permanent inferior vena cava filters are best COMMENT
    Gillespie, David L.
    JOURNAL OF VASCULAR SURGERY-VENOUS AND LYMPHATIC DISORDERS, 2020, 8 (04) : 593 - 593
  • [8] Comparison of bedside transabdominal duplex ultrasound versus contrast venography for inferior vena cava filter placement: What is the best imaging modality?
    Corriere, MA
    Passman, MA
    Guzman, RJ
    Dattilo, JB
    Naslund, TC
    ANNALS OF VASCULAR SURGERY, 2005, 19 (02) : 229 - 234
  • [9] The role of inferior vena cava diameter in the differential diagnosis of dyspneic patients; best sonographic measurement method?
    Yamanoglu, Adnan
    Yamanoglu, Nalan G. Celebi
    Parlak, Ismet
    Pinar, Pelin
    Tosun, Ali
    Erkuran, Burak
    Akgur, Alper
    Siliv, Neslihan Satilmis
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2015, 33 (03): : 396 - 401
  • [10] Automated Ultrasound Measurement of the Inferior Vena Cava: An Animal Study
    Chen, Jiangang
    Li, Jiawei
    Ding, Xin
    Wei, Gaofeng
    Wang, Xiaoting
    Li, Qingli
    ULTRASONIC IMAGING, 2020, 42 (03) : 148 - 158