Inferior Vena Cava Distensibility from Subcostal and Trans-hepatic Imaging Using Both M-mode or Artificial Intelligence: a Prospective Study on Mechanically Ventilated Patients

Overview

Journal Intensive Care Med Exp

Specialty Critical Care

Date 2023 Jul 9

PMID 37423948

Authors

Filippo Sanfilippo

Luigi La Via

Veronica Dezio

Paolo Amelio

Giulio Genoese

Federico Franchi

Antonio Messina

Chiara Robba

Alberto Noto

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Variation of inferior vena cava (IVC) is used to predict fluid-responsiveness, but the IVC visualization with standard sagittal approach (SC, subcostal) cannot be always achieved. In such cases, coronal trans-hepatic (TH) window may offer an alternative, but the interchangeability of IVC measurements in SC and TH is not fully established. Furthermore, artificial intelligence (AI) with automated border detection may be of clinical value but it needs validation.

Methods: Prospective observational validation study in mechanically ventilated patients with pressure-controlled mode. Primary outcome was the IVC distensibility (IVC-DI) in SC and TH imaging, with measurements taken both in M-Mode or with AI software. We calculated mean bias, limits of agreement (LoA), and intra-class correlation (ICC) coefficient.

Results: Thirty-three patients were included. Feasibility rate was 87.9% and 81.8% for SC and TH visualization, respectively. Comparing imaging from the same anatomical site acquired with different modalities (M-Mode vs AI), we found the following IVC-DI differences: (1) SC: mean bias - 3.1%, LoA [- 20.1; 13.9], ICC = 0.65; (2) TH: mean bias - 2.0%, LoA [- 19.3; 15.4], ICC = 0.65. When comparing the results obtained from the same modality but from different sites (SC vs TH), IVC-DI differences were: (3) M-Mode: mean bias 1.1%, LoA [- 6.9; 9.1], ICC = 0.54; (4) AI: mean bias 2.0%, LoA [- 25.7; 29.7], ICC = 0.32.

Conclusions: In patients mechanically ventilated, AI software shows good accuracy (modest overestimation) and moderate correlation as compared to M-mode assessment of IVC-DI, both for SC and TH windows. However, precision seems suboptimal with wide LoA. The comparison of M-Mode or AI between different sites yields similar results but with weaker correlation. Trial registration Reference protocol: 53/2022/PO, approved on 21/03/2022.

Citing Articles

Exploring the Utility of Renal Resistive Index in Critical Care: Insights into ARDS and Cardiac Failure.

Cuttone G, Geraci G, La Via L, Sorbello M, Pappalardo F, Carollo C Biomedicines. 2025; 13(2).

PMID: 40002933 PMC: 11853387. DOI: 10.3390/biomedicines13020519.

Goal-directed fluid therapy on the postoperative complications of laparoscopic hepatobiliary or pancreatic surgery: An interventional comparative study.

Koo B, Oh A, Na H, Han J, Kim H PLoS One. 2024; 19(12):e0315205.

PMID: 39693362 PMC: 11654985. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0315205.

The Integration of Radiomics and Artificial Intelligence in Modern Medicine.

Maniaci A, Lavalle S, Gagliano C, Lentini M, Masiello E, Parisi F Life (Basel). 2024; 14(10).

PMID: 39459547 PMC: 11508875. DOI: 10.3390/life14101248.

Inferior vena cava distensibility during pressure support ventilation: a prospective study evaluating interchangeability of subcostal and trans‑hepatic views, with both M‑mode and automatic border tracing.

Zawadka M, Santonocito C, Dezio V, Amelio P, Messina S, Cardia L J Clin Monit Comput. 2024; 38(5):981-990.

PMID: 38819726 PMC: 11427491. DOI: 10.1007/s10877-024-01177-8.

Association of adherence to the enhanced recovery after surgery pathway and outcomes after laparoscopic total gastrectomy.

Hao Y, Zhao Q, Jiang K, Feng X, Ma Y, Zhang J BMC Anesthesiol. 2024; 24(1):110.

PMID: 38519945 PMC: 10958831. DOI: 10.1186/s12871-024-02433-9.

References

Muller L, Bobbia X, Toumi M, Louart G, Molinari N, Ragonnet B . Respiratory variations of inferior vena cava diameter to predict fluid responsiveness in spontaneously breathing patients with acute circulatory failure: need for a cautious use. Crit Care. 2012; 16(5):R188. PMC: 3682290. DOI: 10.1186/cc11672. View

Monnet X, Marik P, Teboul J . Prediction of fluid responsiveness: an update. Ann Intensive Care. 2016; 6(1):111. PMC: 5114218. DOI: 10.1186/s13613-016-0216-7. View

Zhang L, Xu F, Li S, Zheng X, Zheng S, Liu H . Influence of fluid balance on the prognosis of patients with sepsis. BMC Anesthesiol. 2021; 21(1):269. PMC: 8569078. DOI: 10.1186/s12871-021-01489-1. View

Bataille B, de Selle J, Moussot P, Marty P, Silva S, Cocquet P . Machine learning methods to improve bedside fluid responsiveness prediction in severe sepsis or septic shock: an observational study. Br J Anaesth. 2021; 126(4):826-834. DOI: 10.1016/j.bja.2020.11.039. View

Blaivas M, Blaivas L, Tsung J . Deep Learning Pitfall: Impact of Novel Ultrasound Equipment Introduction on Algorithm Performance and the Realities of Domain Adaptation. J Ultrasound Med. 2021; 41(4):855-863. DOI: 10.1002/jum.15765. View

Ono S, Komatsu M, Sakai A, Arima H, Ochida M, Aoyama R . Automated Endocardial Border Detection and Left Ventricular Functional Assessment in Echocardiography Using Deep Learning. Biomedicines. 2022; 10(5). PMC: 9138644. DOI: 10.3390/biomedicines10051082. View

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):240-247. PMC: 6649212. DOI: 10.5935/0103-507X.20190039. View

Morelli A, Sanfilippo F, Arnemann P, Hessler M, Kampmeier T, DEgidio A . The Effect of Propofol and Dexmedetomidine Sedation on Norepinephrine Requirements in Septic Shock Patients: A Crossover Trial. Crit Care Med. 2018; 47(2):e89-e95. DOI: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000003520. View

Sanfilippo F, Huang S, Herpain A, Balik M, Chew M, Clau-Terre F . The PRICES statement: an ESICM expert consensus on methodology for conducting and reporting critical care echocardiography research studies. Intensive Care Med. 2020; 47(1):1-13. DOI: 10.1007/s00134-020-06262-5. View

10.

Airapetian N, Maizel J, Alyamani O, Mahjoub Y, Lorne E, Levrard M . Does inferior vena cava respiratory variability predict fluid responsiveness in spontaneously breathing patients?. Crit Care. 2015; 19:400. PMC: 4643539. DOI: 10.1186/s13054-015-1100-9. View

11.

Wollborn J, Hassenzahl L, Reker D, Staehle H, Omlor A, Baar W . Diagnosing capillary leak in critically ill patients: development of an innovative scoring instrument for non-invasive detection. Ann Intensive Care. 2021; 11(1):175. PMC: 8674404. DOI: 10.1186/s13613-021-00965-8. View

12.

Millington S, Koenig S . Ultrasound Assessment of the Inferior Vena Cava for Fluid Responsiveness: Making the Case for Skepticism. J Intensive Care Med. 2021; 36(10):1223-1227. PMC: 9350457. DOI: 10.1177/08850666211024176. View

13.

Vieillard-Baron A, Millington S, Sanfilippo F, Chew M, Diaz-Gomez J, McLean A . A decade of progress in critical care echocardiography: a narrative review. Intensive Care Med. 2019; 45(6):770-788. DOI: 10.1007/s00134-019-05604-2. View

14.

Kulkarni A, Janarthanan S, Harish M, Suhail S, Chaudhari H, Agarwal V . Agreement between inferior vena cava diameter measurements by subxiphoid versus transhepatic views. Indian J Crit Care Med. 2016; 19(12):719-22. PMC: 4711204. DOI: 10.4103/0972-5229.171390. View

15.

Chan Y . Biostatistics 104: correlational analysis. Singapore Med J. 2004; 44(12):614-9. View

16.

Sanfilippo F, Scolletta S . Fluids in cardiac surgery: sailing calm on a stormy sea? Common sense is the guidance. Minerva Anestesiol. 2017; 83(6):537-539. DOI: 10.23736/S0375-9393.17.11990-5. View

17.

Jozwiak M, Monnet X, Teboul J . Prediction of fluid responsiveness in ventilated patients. Ann Transl Med. 2018; 6(18):352. PMC: 6186547. DOI: 10.21037/atm.2018.05.03. View

18.

Boulain T, Cecconi M . Can one size fit all? The fine line between fluid overload and hypovolemia. Intensive Care Med. 2015; 41(3):544-6. DOI: 10.1007/s00134-015-3683-7. View

19.

Blaivas M, Blaivas L, Philips G, Merchant R, Levy M, Abbasi A . Development of a Deep Learning Network to Classify Inferior Vena Cava Collapse to Predict Fluid Responsiveness. J Ultrasound Med. 2020; 40(8):1495-1504. DOI: 10.1002/jum.15527. View

20.

Jiang R, Yeung D, Behnami D, Luong C, Tsang M, Jue J . A Novel Continuous Left Ventricular Diastolic Function Score Using Machine Learning. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2022; 35(12):1247-1255. DOI: 10.1016/j.echo.2022.06.005. View