Indian Journal of Critical Care Medicine

Register      Login



Volume / Issue

Online First

Related articles

VOLUME 20 , ISSUE 12 ( 2016 ) > List of Articles


Comparative evaluation of central venous pressure and sonographic inferior vena cava variability in assessing fluid responsiveness in septic shock

Manjri Garg, Jyotsna Sen, Sandeep Goyal

Keywords : Central venous pressure, fluid responsiveness, hypovolemia, septic shock, sonographic inferior vena cava variability

Citation Information : Garg M, Sen J, Goyal S. Comparative evaluation of central venous pressure and sonographic inferior vena cava variability in assessing fluid responsiveness in septic shock. Indian J Crit Care Med 2016; 20 (12):708-713.

DOI: 10.4103/0972-5229.195706

License: CC BY-ND 3.0

Published Online: 01-12-2016

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2016; The Author(s).


Objective: Fluid infusion, the most critical step in the resuscitation of patients with septic shock, needs preferably continuous invasive hemodynamic monitoring. The study was planned to evaluate the efficacy of ultrasonographically measured inferior vena cava collapsibility index (IVC CI) in comparison to central venous pressure (CVP) in predicting fluid responsiveness in septic shock. Materials and Methods: Thirty-six patients of septic shock requiring ventilatory support (invasive/noninvasive) were included. Patients with congestive heart failure, raised intra-abdominal pressure, and poor echo window were excluded from the study. They were randomly divided into two groups based on mode of fluid resuscitation - Group I (CVP) and Group II (IVC CI). Primary end-points were mean arterial pressure (MAP) of ≥65 mmHg and CVP >12 mmHg or IVC CI <20% in Groups I and II, respectively. Patients were followed till achievement of end-points or maximum of 6 h. Outcome variables (pulse rate, MAP, urine output, pH, base deficit, and ScvO 2) were serially measured till the end of the study. Survival at 2 and 4 weeks was used as secondary end-point. Results: Primary end-point was reached in 31 patients (15 in Group I and 16 in Group II). Fluid infusion, by either method, had increased CVP and decreased IVC CI with resultant negative correlation between them (Pearson correlation coefficient -0.626). There was no significant difference in the amount of fluid infused and time to reach end-point in two groups. Comparison in outcome variables at baseline and end-point showed no significant difference including mortality. Conclusion: CVP and IVC CI are negatively correlated with fluid resuscitation, and both methods can be used for resuscitation, with IVC CI being noninferior to CVP.

PDF Share
  1. Rivers EP, Jaehne AK, Eichhorn-Wharry L, Brown S, Amponsah D. Fluid therapy in septic shock. Curr Opin Crit Care 2010;16:297-308.
  2. Dorresteijn MJ, van Eijk LT, Netea MG, Smits P, van der Hoeven JG, Pickkers P. Iso-osmolar prehydration shifts the cytokine response towards a more anti-inflammatory balance in human endotoxemia. J Endotoxin Res 2005;11:287-93.
  3. Rivers E, Nguyen B, Havstad S, Ressler J, Muzzin A, Knoblich B, et al. Early goal-directed therapy in the treatment of severe sepsis and septic shock. N Engl J Med 2001;345:1368-77.
  4. Dellinger RP, Carlet JM, Masur H, Gerlach H, Calandra T, Cohen J, et al. Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock. Intensive Care Med 2004;30:536-55.
  5. Packman MI, Rackow EC. Optimum left heart filling pressure during fluid resuscitation of patients with hypovolemic and septic shock. Crit Care Med 1983;11:165-9.
  6. Rosenberg AL, Dechert RE, Park PK, Bartlett RH; NIH NHLBI ARDS Network. Review of a large clinical series: Association of cumulative fluid balance on outcome in acute lung injury: A retrospective review of the ARDSnet tidal volume study cohort. J Intensive Care Med 2009;24:35-46.
  7. Marik PE, Monnet X, Teboul JL. Hemodynamic parameters to guide fluid therapy. Ann Intensive Care 2011;1:1.
  8. Magder S. How to use central venous pressure measurements. Curr Opin Crit Care 2005;11:264-70.
  9. Feissel M, Michard F, Faller JP, Teboul JL. The respiratory variation in inferior vena cava diameter as a guide to fluid therapy. Intensive Care Med 2004;30:1834-7.
  10. Barbier C, Loubières Y, Schmit C, Hayon J, Ricôme JL, Jardin F, et al. Respiratory changes in inferior vena cava diameter are helpful in predicting fluid responsiveness in ventilated septic patients. Intensive Care Med 2004;30:1740-6.
  11. Kircher BJ, Himelman RB, Schiller NB. Noninvasive estimation of right atrial pressure from the inspiratory collapse of the inferior vena cava. Am J Cardiol 1990;66:493-6.
  12. Stawicki SP, Braslow BM, Panebianco NL, Kirkpatrick JN, Gracias VH, Hayden GE, et al. Intensivist use of hand-carried ultrasonography to measure IVC collapsibility in estimating intravascular volume status: Correlations with CVP. J Am Coll Surg 2009;209:55-61.
  13. Schefold JC, Storm C, Bercker S, Pschowski R, Oppert M, Krüger A, et al. Inferior vena cava diameter correlates with invasive hemodynamic measures in mechanically ventilated Intensive Care Unit patients with sepsis. J Emerg Med 2010;38:632-7.
  14. Fields JM, Lee PA, Jenq KY, Mark DG, Panebianco NL, Dean AJ. The interrater reliability of inferior vena cava ultrasound by bedside clinician sonographers in emergency department patients. Acad Emerg Med 2011;18:98-101.
  15. Nagdev AD, Merchant RC, Tirado-Gonzalez A, Sisson CA, Murphy MC. Emergency department bedside ultrasonographic measurement of the caval index for noninvasive determination of low central venous pressure. Ann Emerg Med 2010;55:290-5.
  16. Dellinger RP, Levy MM, Carlet JM, Bion J, Parker MM, Jaeschke R, et al. Surviving sepsis campaign guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock. Intensive Care Med 2004;36:296-327.
  17. Marik PE, Baram M, Vahid B. Does central venous pressure predict fluid responsiveness? A systematic review of the literature and the tale of seven mares. Chest 2008;134:172-8.
  18. Jeffrey RB Jr., Federle MP. The collapsed inferior vena cava: CT evidence of hypovolemia. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1988;150:431-2.
  19. Jardin F, Vieillard-Baron A. Ultrasonographic examination of the venae cavae. Intensive Care Med 2006;32:203-6.
  20. van Beest PA, Hofstra JJ, Schultz MJ, Boerma EC, Spronk PE, Kuiper MA. The incidence of low venous oxygen saturation on admission to the Intensive Care Unit: A multi-center observational study in The Netherlands. Crit Care 2008;12:R33.
  21. Krafft P, Steltzer H, Hiesmayr M, Klimscha W, Hammerle AF. Mixed venous oxygen saturation in critically ill septic shock patients. The role of defined events. Chest 1993;103:900-6.
  22. Perel A. Bench-to-bedside review: The initial hemodynamic resuscitation of the septic patient according to surviving sepsis campaign guidelines - Does one size fit all? Crit Care 2008;12:2-5.
  23. Knaus WA, Draper EA, Wagner DP. APACHE II: A severity of disease classification system. Crit Care Med 1985;13:818-29.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.