Key result
Preoperative assessment of the IVC:Ao index provided superior predictive performance for postinduction hypotension compared with the IVC-CI (AUC 0.971 vs 0.846; p=0.025).
Why the study?
Does the preoperative IVC:Ao index predict postinduction hypotension better than the IVC-CI in adult patients undergoing elective surgery under general anesthesia?
Observational (n=100)
No
Does the preoperative IVC:Ao index predict postinduction hypotension better than the IVC-CI in adult patients undergoing elective surgery under general anesthesia?
Odds Ratio: 4.95 (95% CI 2.43–10.09)
p-value: p=<0.001
Preoperative ultrasonographic assessment of the IVC:Ao index provides superior predictive performance and a narrower gray zone compared with the IVC-CI for identifying patients at risk of postinduction hypotension.
No abstract yet. The journal hasn't published one we can show.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Eskin et al. (2026) conducted an observational in Elective surgery under general anesthesia (n=100). Caval-aortic (IVC:Ao) index vs. Inferior vena cava collapsibility index (IVC-CI) was evaluated on Postinduction hypotension (OR 4.95, 95% CI 2.43-10.09, p=<0.001). Preoperative assessment of the IVC:Ao index provided superior predictive performance for postinduction hypotension compared with the IVC-CI (AUC 0.971 vs 0.846; p=0.025).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: