Key result
External JVP agrees closely with CVP in supine patients but less so in lateral positions.
Why the study?
Does external jugular venous pressure agree with central venous pressure in spontaneously breathing, anaesthetised patients undergoing repair of proximal femoral fractures?
Observational (n=31)
Single-blind
Does external jugular venous pressure agree with central venous pressure in spontaneously breathing, anaesthetised patients undergoing repair of proximal femoral fractures?
External jugular venous pressure monitoring is a clinically useful and less invasive alternative to central venous pressure monitoring in supine, spontaneously breathing anesthetized patients.
May support external jugular venous pressure as less invasive central venous pressure surrogate in supine patients; leaves open reliability in lateral positioning.
Invasive cardiovascular monitoring during anaesthesia for patients with hip fractures is rare, which has attracted concern [1]. This may be partly because central venous pressure (CVP) monitoring has serious complications. However, CVP monitoring may reduce the incidence of perioperative hypotension and the time to discharge [2]. External jugular venous pressure (JVP) agrees with CVP in mechanically ventilated patients [3] and is simple and free from major complication. After LREC approval and informed consent, we compared external JVP with CVP in spontaneously breathing, anaesthetised patients having repair of fractured neck of femur. Patients were given a standard general anaesthetic, breathing spontaneously via a laryngeal mask airway. A single lumen 18-G catheter was placed to monitor CVP and a 32-mm 20-G cannula was placed in the external jugular vein. Paired measurements of mean CVP and mean external JVP were made at 10-min intervals by a blinded observer in random order and at end-expiration. Mean venous pressure was used to guide fluid challenges (Haemaccel 3 ml/kg). Patients’ position was determined by surgical procedure and surgical preference. Thirty-five patients were recruited but data were unavailable from four. Of the remaining 31, 22 were supine (157 measurements) and nine lateral (72 measurements). External JVP agrees closely with CVP in supine patients and is clinically useful, but the lateral position produces less agreement.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Allsager et al. (2002) conducted an observational in Proximal femoral fractures (n=31). External jugular venous pressure (JVP) monitoring vs. Central venous pressure (CVP) monitoring was evaluated on Agreement between mean CVP and mean external JVP. External jugular venous pressure agrees closely with central venous pressure in supine patients undergoing repair of proximal femoral fractures, but the lateral position produces less agreement.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: