Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Cross-sectional observational study compares IVC/Ao ratio and vital signs in children receiving fluid bolus.
OBJECTIVE: To compare IVC/Ao ratio, IVC collapsibility/distensibility indices before and after the administration of fluid bolus therapy in children with non-hemorrhagic shock using point of care ultrasound, and to correlate the changes in IVC/Ao ratio after fluid bolus therapy with changes in heart rate, shock index, and blood pressure. METHODS: Cross-sectional observational study was conducted in children aged 1 to 12 years with non-hemorrhagic shock requiring fluid bolus therapy. Vital parameters were recorded and IVC diameter, IVC collapsibility/distensibility, IVC/Aorta ratio were measured using point of care ultrasound before and after administration of fluid bolus. RESULTS: IVC/Aorta ratio showed a significant increase [0.79 (0.06) vs. 0.91 (0.07); P<0.001] after fluid bolus. Also, a significant decrease was observed in IVC collapsibility /distensibility indices from 58.29 (8.28) and 49.26 (15.50) to 37.39 (8.03) and 29.51 (10.55), respectively. Change in IVC/Aorta ratio showed a weak positive correlation with change in heart rate (r=0.28), and shock index (r=0.26). CONCLUSIONS: Although IVC/Aorta ratio and IVC indices reflect physiological response to fluid therapy in children with non-hemorrhagic shock, its weak correlation with other clinical parameters limits its clinical utility. Further studies with larger sample sizes are needed to validate these findings.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hamsika et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: