Key result
Three IVC ultrasound criteria show poor agreement for assessing hemodynamic congestion in ADHF.
Why the study?
The reliability and agreement of different echocardiographic criteria using IVC diameters and collapsibility index to estimate hemodynamic congestion in ADHF patients were unclear.
Do different echocardiographic criteria for evaluating inferior vena cava (IVC) diameters and collapsibility index agree in classifying hemodynamic congestion in patients with acute decompensated heart failure?
Observational (n=47)
Do different echocardiographic criteria for evaluating inferior vena cava (IVC) diameters and collapsibility index agree in classifying hemodynamic congestion in patients with acute decompensated heart failure?
Effect estimate: Cohen's kappa 0.369 (95% CI 0.197-0.54)
Absolute Event Rate: 46.8% vs 34%
Different echocardiographic criteria for evaluating inferior vena cava indices to estimate hemodynamic congestion in acute decompensated heart failure are inconsistent and show poor agreement.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
IVC criteria should not yet guide congestion assessment interchangeably in acute HF; leaves open need for standardized validation.
Vecchis et al. (2015) conducted an observational in Acute decompensated heart failure (n=47). IVC ultrasonographic criteria (Rudski, Stawicki, Pellicori) vs. Inter-method comparison was evaluated on Inter-method agreement for persistent congestion (Rudski vs Stawicki criteria) (Cohen's kappa 0.369, 95% CI 0.197-0.54). Three different IVC ultrasonographic criteria for evaluating hemodynamic congestion in acute decompensated heart failure showed poor inter-method agreement (Cohen's kappa 0.299 to 0.468).
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: