Alavi-Moghaddam Mostafa, Kabir Ali, Shojaee Majid, Manouchehrifar Mohammad, Moghimi Mehrdad
1 Emergency Medicine Department, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
2 Minimally Invasive Surgery Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Acta Radiol. 2017 May;58(5):537-541. doi: 10.1177/0284185116663045. Epub 2016 Sep 30.
Background Until now, no valid alternative exists for predicting central venous pressure (CVP) with lower invasiveness than central venous catheter. Purpose To explore inferior vena cava diameter (IVCD) measurement accuracy by ultrasonography as a surrogate variable for determination of central venous pressure (CVP). Material and Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis of all published studies in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Knowledge, and Google Scholar were conducted from inception to July 2013. We used the STROBE checklist for quality assessment and meta-regression. Results Thirty-seven papers with 2843 cases were identified. The correlation coefficients between each one of IVCD, inspiratory IVC (iIVC), IVC collapsibility index (IVCCI), and expiratory IVC (eIVC) with CVP, were 0.68, 0.60, 0.54, and 0.44, respectively. There was no evidence of publication bias ( P = 0.28). Based on meta-regression, male gender was an important source of heterogeneity (OR = 1.01; 95% confidence interval, 1-1.03), which resulted in a higher correlation between IVCD and CVP. The present study showed a higher strength of association with CVP pertaining to IVCD, iIVC, IVCCI, and eIVC, respectively, and they were higher in men. Conclusion This study does not support the measurement of IVCD by ultrasonography as an acceptable surrogate variable to determine CVP among critical patients.
到目前为止,尚无比中心静脉导管侵入性更低的有效替代方法来预测中心静脉压(CVP)。目的:探讨超声测量下腔静脉直径(IVCD)作为确定中心静脉压(CVP)替代变量的准确性。材料与方法:对PubMed、Scopus、Web of Knowledge和Google Scholar数据库中从建库至2013年7月发表的所有研究进行系统评价和荟萃分析。我们使用STROBE清单进行质量评估和荟萃回归分析。结果:共纳入37篇论文,2843例病例。IVCD、吸气时下腔静脉(iIVC)、下腔静脉塌陷指数(IVCCI)和呼气时下腔静脉(eIVC)与CVP的相关系数分别为0.68、0.60、0.54和0.44。无发表偏倚证据(P = 0.28)。基于荟萃回归分析,男性是异质性的重要来源(OR = 1.01;95%置信区间为1 - 1.03),这导致IVCD与CVP之间的相关性更高。本研究显示IVCD、iIVC、IVCCI和eIVC与CVP的关联强度分别更高,且在男性中更高。结论:本研究不支持将超声测量IVCD作为确定危重症患者CVP的可接受替代变量。