DOI: https://doi.org/10.14710/jai.v0i0.69705

Comparison Of Inferior Vena Cava Distensibility Index and Pulse Pressure Variation as Predictors Of Fluid Responsiveness in Sepsis Patients at ICU

1Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Diponegoro/ RSUP Dr. Kariadi, Semarang, Indonesia, Indonesia

2Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Diponegoro/ RSUP Dr. Kariadi, Semarang, Indonesia

Received: 29 Dec 2024; Revised: 19 Jan 2026; Accepted: 26 Jan 2026; Available online: 26 Dec 2026.
Open Access Copyright 2021 JAI (Jurnal Anestesiologi Indonesia)
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Citation Format:
Abstract

Background : Sepsis is a major global health challenge with an estimated 49 million incident cases and 11 million deaths each year, which requires appropriate fluid management to improve patient prognosis. This study aims to compare the effectiveness of Inferior Vena Cava Distensibility Index (IVC-DI) and Pulse Pressure Variation (PPV) as predictors of fluid responsiveness in sepsis patients in the ICU.

Methods : This study used an experimental design with a sample of 36 sepsis patients selected through consecutive sampling. Fluid administration of 500 ml RL was carried out for 15 minutes, followed by measurement of IVC-DI and PPV, and evaluation of an increase in Stroke Volume (SV) > 15% as an indicator of fluid responsiveness.

Results : The study showed that PPV had a sensitivity of 93% and specificity of 90%, with a positive predictive value of 87.5% and a negative predictive value of 95%. The overall accuracy of PPV was 91.6%. PPV showed a very strong correlation with SV increase > 15% (r = 0.832, p < 0.001). On the other hand, IVC-DI had a sensitivity of 80% and specificity of 71%, with a positive predictive value of 66% and a negative predictive value of 83%. The overall accuracy of the IVC-DI was 75%. The IVC-DI showed moderate correlation with SV increase >15% (r = 0.507, p = 0.002). Inter-observer agreement in IVC-DI measurements also showed excellent results with a Kappa value of 1.00, indicating perfect agreement. From the results of this study, PPV proved to be more accurate in predicting fluid responsiveness compared to IVC-DI in sepsis patients in the ICU. These two methods, although equally useful, showed different levels of effectiveness in this clinical context.

Conclusion : This study makes an important contribution to the selection of method to assess fluid responsiveness in sepsis patients, which can assist in better clinical decision-making and improve patient care outcomes in the ICU.

Keywords : Sepsis, Fluid Responsiveness, Pulse Pressure Variation, Inferior Vena Cava Distensibility Index, Intensive Care Unit.

Note: This article has supplementary file(s).

Fulltext |  Research Instrument
Abstract Graphics
Subject
Type Research Instrument
  View (438KB)    Indexing metadata
 Research Instrument
Ethical Clearance
Subject
Type Research Instrument
  Download (154KB)    Indexing metadata
 Research Instrument
Copyright Transfer Agreement
Subject
Type Research Instrument
  Download (3MB)    Indexing metadata

Article Metrics:

Article Info
Section: Original Articles
Recent articles
Assessment of Clinical Ethics Application and Patient Satisfaction in Anesthesiology Services: A Cross-Sectional Study COMPARISON OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF LOCAL ANESTHETIC INFILTRATION OF 0.25% ROPIVACAINE AND 0.375% ROPIVACAINE ON CESAREAN SECTION INCISION WITH SPINAL ANESTHESIA Comparison Of Inferior Vena Cava Distensibility Index and Pulse Pressure Variation as Predictors Of Fluid Responsiveness in Sepsis Patients at ICU Anesthesia for ASD Closure in Robotic-Assisted Cardiac Surgery: A Case Report Bad Lung Down Phenomenon During Spinal Positioning for Hip Hemiarthroplasty: A Case Report Interlaminar Cervical Epidural Non-Particulate Steroid Injection for Acute Cervical Radicular Pain: A Case Study of Clinical Effectiveness Prognostic Value of the Lactate/Albumin Ratio for Mortality in Sepsis-Associated Acute Kidney Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis More recent articles
Most cited articles
Midazolam Intravena Dosis Rendah Tidak Mempengaruhi Nitric Oxide Intraperitoneal Mencit Balb/C Yang Terpapar Lipopolisakarida Patofisiologi Penyakit Jantung Koroner More cited articles
  1. Angus DC, Barnato AE, Bell D, Bellomo R, Chong CR, Coats TJ, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of early goal-directed therapy for septic shock: the ARISE, ProCESS and ProMISe Investigators. Intensive Care Med. 2015 Sep 8;41(9):1549–60
  2. Casey JD, Brown RM, Semler MW. Resuscitation fluids. Curr Opin Crit Care. 2018 Dec;24(6):512–8
  3. Grassi P, Grassi P, Lo Nigro L, Battaglia K, Barone M, Testa F, et al. Pulse pressure variation as a predictor of fluid responsiveness in mechanically ventilated patients with spontaneous breathing activity: a pragmatic observational study. Vol. 5, Proc Intensive Care Cardiovasc Anesth. 2013
  4. Furtado S, Reis L. Inferior vena cava evaluation in fluid therapy decision making in intensive care: practical implications. Rev Bras Ter Intensiva. 2019;31(2)
  5. Brennan JM, Blair JE, Goonewardena S, Ronan A, Shah D, Vasaiwala S, et al. Reappraisal of the Use of Inferior Vena Cava for Estimating Right Atrial Pressure. Journal of the American Society of Echocardiography. 2007 Jul;20(7):857–61
  6. Feissel M, Michard F, Faller JP, Teboul JL. The respiratory variation in inferior vena cava diameter as a guide to fluid therapy. Intensive Care Med. 2004 Sep 25;30(9)
  7. Cherpanath TGV, Geerts BF, Lagrand WK, Schultz MJ, Groeneveld ABJ. Basic concepts of fluid responsiveness. Vol. 21, Netherlands Heart Journal. 2013. p. 530–6
  8. Yang X, Du B. Does pulse pressure variation predict fluid responsiveness in critically ill patients? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Crit Care. 2014 Nov 27;18(6):650
  9. Charron C, Fessenmeyer C, Cosson C, Mazoit JX, Hebert JL, Benhamou D, et al. The Influence of Tidal Volume on the Dynamic Variables of Fluid Responsiveness in Critically Ill Patients. Anesth Analg. 2006 May;102(5):1511–7
  10. Feissel M, Teboul JL, Merlani P, Badie J, Faller JP, Bendjelid K. Plethysmographic dynamic indices predict fluid responsiveness in septic ventilated patients. Intensive Care Med. 2007 May 24;33(6):993–9
  11. Barbier C, Loubières Y, Schmit C, Hayon J, Ricôme JL, Jardin F, et al. Respiratory changes in inferior vena cava diameter are helpful in predicting fluid responsiveness in ventilated septic patients. Intensive Care Med. 2004 Sep 18;30(9):1740–6
  12. Zhang Z, Xu X, Ye S, Xu L. Ultrasonographic Measurement of the Respiratory Variation in the Inferior Vena Cava Diameter Is Predictive of Fluid Responsiveness in Critically Ill Patients: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2014 May;40(5):845–53
  13. Cardozo Júnior LCM, Lemos GSD, Besen BAMP. Fluid responsiveness assessment using inferior vena cava collapsibility among spontaneously breathing patients: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Medicina Intensiva (English Edition). 2023 Feb;47(2):90–8
  14. Monnet X, Marik PE, Teboul JL. Prediction of fluid responsiveness: an update. Ann Intensive Care. 2016 Dec 17;6(1):111
  15. Boyd JH, Forbes J, Nakada T aki, Walley KR, Russell JA. Fluid resuscitation in septic shock: A positive fluid balance and elevated central venous pressure are associated with increased mortality*. Crit Care Med. 2011 Feb;39(2):259–65

Last update:

No citation recorded.

Last update: 2026-01-29 17:58:49

No citation recorded.