Sam Jenkins1, Patrick Knowles2, Norman Briffa3,2. 1. Department of Infection, Immunity and Cardiovascular Disease, University of Sheffield Medical School, Sheffield, S10 2RX, UK. samelliotjenkins@gmail.com. 2. Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHSFT, Sheffield, UK. 3. Department of Infection, Immunity and Cardiovascular Disease, University of Sheffield Medical School, Sheffield, S10 2RX, UK.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to determine whether ultrasound-measured jugular venous pressure (U-JVP) could accurately estimate central venous pressure (CVP). METHODS: This prospective, diagnostic, single-centre study was performed at the Cardiac Intensive Care Unit of the Northern General Hospital, Sheffield, UK. Post-cardiac surgery patients were recruited from January to May 2019. The investigators were blinded to the central venous pressure when measuring the jugular venous pressure. U-JVP and direct CVP were measured simultaneously. Measurements were taken whilst the patient was ventilated and then repeated when the patient was extubated, providing non-ventilated readings. RESULTS: One-hundred and fourteen consecutive participants with a male predominance of 71% and mean age of 65 ± 12 years were included in the analysis. Bland-Altman plots revealed that U-JVP marginally overestimated CVP by 0.91 mmHg (95% limits of agreement were -2.936 to 4.754) in ventilated patients and by 0.11 mmHg (95% limits of agreement between -2.481 and 2.695) in non-ventilated patients. Reasonable sensitivity and specificity of ultrasound-measured jugular venous pressure was achieved for low and high central venous pressure in both ventilated and non-ventilated patients. CONCLUSION: U-JVP accurately estimates cardiac filling pressure and fluid status in patients after cardiac surgery, irrespective of their ventilatory status. Jugular venous pressure measurement by insonation is a reliable technique that can be taught to medical students and other health professionals to non-invasively estimate central venous pressure and may be useful for assessment of volaemic status in patients with heart failure. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov public (identifier NCT03815188).
PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to determine whether ultrasound-measured jugular venous pressure (U-JVP) could accurately estimate central venous pressure (CVP). METHODS: This prospective, diagnostic, single-centre study was performed at the Cardiac Intensive Care Unit of the Northern General Hospital, Sheffield, UK. Post-cardiac surgery patients were recruited from January to May 2019. The investigators were blinded to the central venous pressure when measuring the jugular venous pressure. U-JVP and direct CVP were measured simultaneously. Measurements were taken whilst the patient was ventilated and then repeated when the patient was extubated, providing non-ventilated readings. RESULTS: One-hundred and fourteen consecutive participants with a male predominance of 71% and mean age of 65 ± 12 years were included in the analysis. Bland-Altman plots revealed that U-JVP marginally overestimated CVP by 0.91 mmHg (95% limits of agreement were -2.936 to 4.754) in ventilated patients and by 0.11 mmHg (95% limits of agreement between -2.481 and 2.695) in non-ventilated patients. Reasonable sensitivity and specificity of ultrasound-measured jugular venous pressure was achieved for low and high central venous pressure in both ventilated and non-ventilated patients. CONCLUSION: U-JVP accurately estimates cardiac filling pressure and fluid status in patients after cardiac surgery, irrespective of their ventilatory status. Jugular venous pressure measurement by insonation is a reliable technique that can be taught to medical students and other health professionals to non-invasively estimate central venous pressure and may be useful for assessment of volaemic status in patients with heart failure. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov public (identifier NCT03815188).
Authors: Mihai Gheorghiade; Ferenc Follath; Piotr Ponikowski; Jeffrey H Barsuk; John E A Blair; John G Cleland; Kenneth Dickstein; Mark H Drazner; Gregg C Fonarow; Tiny Jaarsma; Guillaume Jondeau; Jose Lopez Sendon; Alexander Mebazaa; Marco Metra; Markku Nieminen; Peter S Pang; Petar Seferovic; Lynne W Stevenson; Dirk J van Veldhuisen; Faiez Zannad; Stefan D Anker; Andrew Rhodes; John J V McMurray; Gerasimos Filippatos Journal: Eur J Heart Fail Date: 2010-03-30 Impact factor: 15.534
Authors: William T Abraham; Philip B Adamson; Robert C Bourge; Mark F Aaron; Maria Rosa Costanzo; Lynne W Stevenson; Warren Strickland; Suresh Neelagaru; Nirav Raval; Steven Krueger; Stanislav Weiner; David Shavelle; Bradley Jeffries; Jay S Yadav Journal: Lancet Date: 2011-02-19 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Veli-Pekka Harjola; Wilfried Mullens; Marek Banaszewski; Johann Bauersachs; Hans-Peter Brunner-La Rocca; Ovidiu Chioncel; Sean P Collins; Wolfram Doehner; Gerasimos S Filippatos; Andreas J Flammer; Valentin Fuhrmann; Mitja Lainscak; Johan Lassus; Matthieu Legrand; Josep Masip; Christian Mueller; Zoltán Papp; John Parissis; Elke Platz; Alain Rudiger; Frank Ruschitzka; Andreas Schäfer; Petar M Seferovic; Hadi Skouri; Mehmet Birhan Yilmaz; Alexandre Mebazaa Journal: Eur J Heart Fail Date: 2017-05-30 Impact factor: 15.534
Authors: Piotr Ponikowski; Adriaan A Voors; Stefan D Anker; Héctor Bueno; John G F Cleland; Andrew J S Coats; Volkmar Falk; José Ramón González-Juanatey; Veli-Pekka Harjola; Ewa A Jankowska; Mariell Jessup; Cecilia Linde; Petros Nihoyannopoulos; John T Parissis; Burkert Pieske; Jillian P Riley; Giuseppe M C Rosano; Luis M Ruilope; Frank Ruschitzka; Frans H Rutten; Peter van der Meer Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2016-05-20 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Tobias Szymczyk; Odile Sauzet; Lech J Paluszkiewicz; Angelika Costard-Jäckle; Max Potratz; Volker Rudolph; Jan F Gummert; Henrik Fox Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2020-05-22 Impact factor: 2.357