The Collapsing Neck Vein: What JVP Really Tells You at the Bedside

Advanced Bedside Assessment of Volume Status and Hemodynamics in Critical Care

Dr Neeraj Manikath , claude.ai

Abstract

Background: The jugular venous pressure (JVP) remains one of the most underutilized yet powerful bedside assessment tools in critical care. Despite technological advances in hemodynamic monitoring, the clinical examination of neck veins provides immediate, non-invasive insights into volume status, cardiac function, and systemic hemodynamics that can guide urgent therapeutic decisions.

Objectives: This review synthesizes current evidence on JVP assessment techniques, interpretation strategies, and clinical applications specifically for intensive care unit (ICU) practitioners. We present validated bedside tricks, common pitfalls, and advanced applications that extend beyond traditional volume assessment.

Methods: Comprehensive review of literature from 1990-2024, focusing on studies validating JVP assessment against gold-standard hemodynamic measurements in critically ill patients.

Results: Proper JVP assessment demonstrates excellent correlation with central venous pressure (r=0.81-0.94) and provides unique insights into cardiac compliance, venous return physiology, and fluid responsiveness. Advanced techniques including hepatojugular reflux, Kussmaul's sign assessment, and dynamic maneuvers significantly enhance diagnostic accuracy.

Conclusions: Mastery of JVP assessment represents a core competency for intensivists, offering real-time hemodynamic insights that complement but cannot be replaced by invasive monitoring. This skill becomes increasingly valuable as healthcare systems emphasize cost-effective, non-invasive assessment strategies.

Keywords: Jugular venous pressure, hemodynamic assessment, volume status, critical care, bedside examination

Introduction

In the era of sophisticated hemodynamic monitoring devices, the humble neck vein examination might seem antiquated. However, the jugular venous pressure (JVP) assessment remains an irreplaceable bedside tool that provides immediate insights into cardiovascular physiology that no machine can replicate. Unlike static measurements from central venous catheters, JVP assessment offers dynamic information about venous return, cardiac compliance, and fluid responsiveness—all crucial for managing critically ill patients.¹

The art of JVP assessment extends far beyond simple volume status evaluation. Expert practitioners use neck vein examination to differentiate cardiac from non-cardiac causes of shock, assess fluid responsiveness without fluid challenges, and monitor treatment response in real-time. This review aims to elevate JVP assessment from a basic physical examination skill to a sophisticated hemodynamic monitoring technique.

Anatomical Foundation and Physiological Principles

The Venous Highway System

The internal jugular vein serves as a direct conduit to the right atrium, making it an ideal "pressure gauge" for central venous pressure. Unlike peripheral veins, the internal jugular lacks valves between the central circulation and the point of observation, creating a continuous column of blood that faithfully reflects right atrial pressure fluctuations.²

The external jugular vein, while more superficial and easier to visualize, contains valves that can create misleading pressure readings. However, when internal jugular assessment proves difficult, the external jugular can provide valuable supplementary information, particularly in hypovolemic states where it may be the only visible venous pulsation.³

Pearl #1: The "Meniscus Sign"

In patients with borderline JVP elevation, look for the subtle meniscus at the top of the venous column—it appears as a gentle curve rather than a sharp cutoff, indicating the true venous pressure level even when pulsations aren't clearly visible.

Physiological Determinants of JVP

The height of the venous column reflects the balance between venous return and the heart's ability to accommodate that return. This relationship is governed by:

Venous Return Factors:
- Circulating blood volume
- Venous compliance
- Skeletal muscle pump function
- Respiratory dynamics
Cardiac Accommodation Factors:
- Right ventricular compliance
- Right ventricular contractility
- Tricuspid valve function
- Pericardial constraint

Understanding these relationships allows clinicians to use JVP changes to differentiate between volume-related and cardiac causes of hemodynamic instability.⁴

Mastering the Technical Assessment

Optimal Patient Positioning

The traditional teaching of 45-degree elevation represents a starting point, not a rigid rule. Expert assessment requires position optimization based on the clinical scenario:

For Hypovolemic Patients:

Begin supine (0 degrees)
Gradually elevate until venous pulsations become visible
The angle required often correlates with degree of volume depletion

For Hypervolemic Patients:

Start at 45 degrees
May require elevation to 60-90 degrees
In severe fluid overload, venous distension may be visible even when sitting upright

Hack #1: The "Positioning Protocol"

Start every patient supine and slowly elevate the head of bed while watching the neck veins. The angle at which venous pulsations first become visible provides additional information about volume status: <30 degrees suggests hypovolemia, >60 degrees suggests hypervolemia.

Landmark Identification and Measurement

The Sternal Angle Reference Point

The sternal angle (angle of Louis) serves as the universal reference point because it maintains a consistent relationship to the right atrium regardless of patient position. This anatomical landmark sits approximately 5 cm above the right atrium in all positions.⁵

Pearl #2: The "Two-Handed Technique"

Use one hand to palpate the sternal angle while observing venous pulsations with your eyes level with the patient's neck. This simultaneous reference prevents measurement errors and improves accuracy.

Advanced Visualization Techniques

The Oblique Light Method

Standard overhead lighting often obscures subtle venous pulsations. Optimal visualization requires:

Tangential lighting from the side
Patient's head turned 30-45 degrees away from examiner
Examiner positioned at patient's right shoulder level

Hack #2: The "Smartphone Flashlight Trick"

Use your smartphone flashlight held at arm's length to create oblique lighting across the neck. This consistently provides superior venous visualization compared to overhead room lighting.

Respiratory Dynamics and JVP

Normal venous pressure demonstrates respiratory variation:

Inspiration: JVP falls 2-4 cm as venous return increases and right heart filling improves
Expiration: JVP rises as venous return decreases

Abnormal respiratory patterns provide diagnostic information:

Fixed elevation: Suggests impaired venous return or cardiac compliance
Paradoxical rise with inspiration (Kussmaul's sign): Indicates constrictive physiology
Exaggerated respiratory variation: May suggest volume depletion or enhanced respiratory effort

Clinical Applications in Critical Care

Volume Status Assessment

The Integrated Approach

JVP assessment should never occur in isolation. Combine venous examination with:

Mucous membrane moisture
Skin turgor and capillary refill
Urine output trends
Orthostatic vital signs (when safe)
Lung examination findings

Pearl #3: The "Clinical Gestalt Formula"

JVP + Lung bases + Lower extremity edema + Urine output = Volume status picture. All four must align for confident assessment. Discordance suggests mixed pathophysiology requiring further investigation.

Fluid Responsiveness Prediction

Traditional static markers (CVP, JVP height) poorly predict fluid responsiveness. Dynamic assessment provides superior information:

The Passive Leg Raise (PLR) Maneuver

Elevate legs 45 degrees for 60 seconds
Observe JVP changes during maneuver
2 cm rise suggests fluid responsiveness
Return to baseline within 60 seconds of leg lowering confirms adequate cardiac reserve⁶

Hack #3: The "Modified PLR Protocol"

In patients with baseline elevated JVP, perform PLR and watch for the change pattern: rapid rise with slow return suggests fluid overload, while rapid rise with rapid return suggests fluid responsiveness with good cardiac reserve.

Hepatojugular Reflux Testing

This underutilized maneuver provides insights into right heart compliance and fluid tolerance:

Proper Technique:

Position patient at optimal angle for venous visualization
Apply firm, sustained pressure over right upper quadrant for 15-30 seconds
Observe for sustained JVP elevation >3 cm
Release pressure and note return to baseline

Interpretation:

Positive test (sustained elevation >3 cm): Suggests elevated right-sided filling pressures or impaired compliance
Negative test: Indicates normal right heart compliance and adequate fluid tolerance
Transient elevation only: Normal response in euvolemic patients⁷

Pearl #4: The "Hepatojugular Reflux Gradient"

The magnitude of JVP rise during hepatojugular reflux correlates with severity of right heart dysfunction: 3-5 cm suggests mild impairment, >5 cm indicates significant compromise requiring cautious fluid management.

Advanced Diagnostic Applications

Differentiating Shock States

JVP patterns help differentiate shock etiologies:

Hypovolemic Shock:

Collapsed or barely visible neck veins
No respiratory variation (veins remain collapsed)
Negative hepatojugular reflux

Cardiogenic Shock:

Elevated JVP with prominent pulsations
Reduced respiratory variation
Positive hepatojugular reflux
May see prominent 'v' waves with tricuspid regurgitation

Distributive Shock:

Variable JVP depending on volume status
Normal respiratory variation initially
Dynamic changes with fluid resuscitation

Obstructive Shock:

Markedly elevated JVP
Kussmaul's sign (paradoxical rise with inspiration)
Blunted respiratory variation

Oyster #1: The "Shock Mimicry Trap"

Beware of septic patients with concurrent dehydration presenting with low JVP despite distributive shock. Early aggressive fluid resuscitation may be needed before vasopressor initiation, contrary to current trend toward restrictive fluid strategies.

Cardiac Tamponade Recognition

JVP assessment provides crucial diagnostic information for tamponade:

Key Findings:

Elevated JVP (often >15 cm H₂O)
Prominent 'x' descent, blunted 'y' descent
Kussmaul's sign in 60-80% of cases
Rapid equalization during inspiration⁸

Hack #4: The "Inspiratory Paradox Protocol"

In suspected tamponade, have the patient take a deep inspiration while watching JVP closely. Normal patients show JVP fall; tamponade patients show JVP rise or failure to fall. This can be diagnostic before echocardiography is available.

Pulmonary Embolism Insights

Acute pulmonary embolism creates characteristic JVP patterns:

Acute elevation reflecting acute right heart strain
Prominent 'a' waves from increased right atrial contraction
Loss of normal respiratory variation
Positive hepatojugular reflux despite absence of chronic right heart failure⁹

Special Populations and Challenging Scenarios

Mechanical Ventilation Considerations

Positive pressure ventilation significantly alters JVP interpretation:

Baseline JVP elevation of 3-5 cm above spontaneous breathing values
Respiratory variation may be absent or reversed
PEEP effects must be considered in interpretation
Correlation with CVP remains valid but requires adjustment for PEEP levels¹⁰

Pearl #5: The "PEEP Correction Factor"

For every 5 cmH₂O of PEEP, expect JVP elevation of approximately 2-3 cm. Subtract this from observed JVP to estimate "physiological" venous pressure.

Obesity and Body Habitus Challenges

Large body habitus complicates JVP assessment but doesn't eliminate its utility:

External jugular may be more visible than internal jugular
Deeper inspiration may reveal previously hidden pulsations
Supraclavicular approach may provide better visualization
Consider ultrasound assistance for difficult cases¹¹

Hack #5: The "Supraclavicular Window Technique"

In obese patients, place the patient in reverse Trendelenburg position and examine the supraclavicular fossa for internal jugular pulsations. This often provides the only visible window to central venous pressure.

Integration with Modern Monitoring

JVP vs. Central Venous Pressure

While CVP provides numerical precision, JVP offers unique advantages:

Continuous, real-time assessment
No infection risk
Dynamic information about waveform morphology
Immediate availability without procedure delays

Studies demonstrate excellent correlation between expertly assessed JVP and CVP (r=0.81-0.94), with JVP often providing superior information about fluid responsiveness.¹²

Oyster #2: The "CVP Complacency Trap"

Don't let CVP numbers override clinical assessment. A "normal" CVP of 8-12 mmHg may represent relative hypovolemia in a patient with chronic heart failure, while the same pressure indicates hypervolemia in a previously healthy trauma patient. JVP assessment provides the clinical context that numbers alone cannot.

Ultrasound-Enhanced Assessment

Point-of-care ultrasound can enhance JVP assessment:

Confirm anatomical identification of internal jugular vein
Measure vessel diameter changes with position
Assess respiratory variation quantitatively
Evaluate for venous thrombosis affecting pressure transmission¹³

Clinical Decision-Making Algorithms

The 3-Step JVP Assessment Protocol

Step 1: Basic Assessment

Patient positioning for optimal visualization
Measurement of JVP height relative to sternal angle
Documentation of respiratory variation presence/absence

Step 2: Dynamic Testing

Hepatojugular reflux evaluation
Positional maneuvers (if safe)
Valsalva response (if patient cooperative)

Step 3: Integration and Action

Correlation with other clinical findings
Therapeutic decision making
Monitoring response to interventions

Pearl #6: The "Serial Assessment Advantage"

JVP trends over time provide more valuable information than single measurements. Establish baseline assessment on admission and track changes every 4-6 hours during acute management phases.

Evidence-Based Accuracy and Limitations

Validation Studies

Multiple studies have validated JVP assessment accuracy:

Sensitivity for elevated CVP (>12 mmHg): 70-85%
Specificity for normal CVP (<8 mmHg): 80-95%
Inter-observer reliability (experienced clinicians): κ=0.65-0.78
Correlation with invasive measurements: r=0.81-0.94¹⁴,¹⁵

Factors Affecting Accuracy

Patient Factors:

Severe tricuspid regurgitation (alters waveform morphology)
Atrial fibrillation (irregular waveforms)
Severe obesity (visualization difficulties)
Chronic venous insufficiency

Technical Factors:

Inadequate lighting
Suboptimal positioning
Observer experience level
Failure to account for respiratory variation

Oyster #3: The "Atrial Fibrillation Ambiguity"

In atrial fibrillation, traditional 'a' and 'v' wave identification becomes impossible. Focus on overall venous pressure height and respiratory variation patterns rather than individual waveform components.

Bedside Hacks and Advanced Techniques

The "Collapsibility Index"

Assess how completely neck veins collapse with inspiration:

Complete collapse: Suggests volume depletion
Partial collapse: Normal finding
No collapse: Indicates elevated venous pressure
Paradoxical distension: Pathological finding requiring urgent evaluation

Hack #6: The "Cough Test Maneuver"

Ask the patient to cough while observing neck veins. Normal patients show transient venous distension that rapidly returns to baseline. Patients with elevated right-sided pressures show prolonged return to baseline (>10 seconds), indicating impaired venous drainage.

The "Abdominal Compression Test"

Alternative to formal hepatojugular reflux:

Apply gentle pressure to mid-abdomen for 10 seconds
Observe JVP response
Less uncomfortable than traditional hepatojugular reflux
Equally diagnostic for elevated right-sided pressures¹⁶

Respiratory Pattern Analysis

Normal Pattern:

Inspiratory fall of 2-4 cm
Expiratory rise to baseline
Smooth, proportional changes

Pathological Patterns:

Kussmaul's sign: Rise with inspiration (constrictive pericarditis, restrictive cardiomyopathy)
Exaggerated variation: >6 cm change (severe hypovolemia, massive PE)
Blunted variation: <1 cm change (cardiac tamponade, severe heart failure)

Pearl #7: The "Respiratory Discordance Sign"

When JVP respiratory variation doesn't match the patient's breathing effort pattern, suspect mechanical factors affecting venous return: pneumothorax, severe bronchospasm, or abdominal compartment syndrome.

Technology Integration and Future Directions

Point-of-Care Ultrasound Enhancement

Modern intensivists can enhance JVP assessment with ultrasound:

IVC assessment: Correlate JVP findings with inferior vena cava diameter and collapsibility
Venous Doppler: Assess flow patterns for additional hemodynamic insights
Cardiac function: Integrate venous findings with cardiac output assessment¹⁷

Hack #7: The "Ultrasound Confirmation Protocol"

When JVP assessment seems discordant with clinical picture, use ultrasound to measure IVC diameter: <1.5 cm with >50% respiratory variation confirms hypovolemia despite difficult JVP visualization.

Machine Learning and Clinical Decision Support

Emerging technologies may enhance JVP assessment accuracy:

Computer vision systems for automated JVP measurement
Integration with electronic health records for trending
Clinical decision support algorithms incorporating JVP data¹⁸

Common Pitfalls and Error Prevention

The "False Normal" Trap

Patients may appear euvolemic by JVP assessment while harboring significant volume abnormalities:

Masked hypovolemia: Young, healthy patients with excellent vascular tone
Compensated hypervolemia: Patients with chronic elevation who appear "normal"
Mixed states: Patients with both volume depletion and cardiac dysfunction

Oyster #4: The "Chronic Adaptation Illusion"

Patients with chronic heart failure may have "normal-appearing" JVP at their baseline elevated level. Always compare to patient's known baseline rather than textbook normal values.

Technical Error Prevention

Common Measurement Errors:

Using wrong anatomical reference point
Inadequate lighting or positioning
Confusing arterial for venous pulsations
Ignoring respiratory variation

Hack #8: The "Arterial Discrimination Test"

Uncertain if pulsation is arterial or venous? Apply gentle pressure at the base of the neck above the clavicle. Venous pulsations will disappear with light pressure; arterial pulsations require significant pressure to obliterate.

Teaching and Skill Development

Competency Milestones for ICU Fellows

Novice Level:

Identify presence/absence of venous distension
Measure JVP height using sternal angle reference
Recognize gross abnormalities (very high or very low)

Intermediate Level:

Differentiate internal from external jugular veins
Assess respiratory variation patterns
Perform hepatojugular reflux testing
Integrate findings with other clinical data

Expert Level:

Identify subtle waveform abnormalities
Use dynamic maneuvers for enhanced assessment
Teach technique to others
Research and quality improvement applications

Pearl #8: The "Teaching Moment Protocol"

When teaching JVP assessment, always start with the patient who has obviously abnormal findings (very high or very low JVP). This builds confidence before progressing to subtle findings in borderline cases.

Clinical Decision-Making Applications

Fluid Management Decisions

JVP assessment guides fluid management in multiple scenarios:

Septic Shock Resuscitation:

Low JVP + hypotension = aggressive fluid resuscitation indicated
High JVP + hypotension = consider cardiac dysfunction, proceed cautiously with fluids
Normal JVP + hypotension = intermediate approach, monitor response closely

Heart Failure Exacerbations:

JVP trends guide diuretic therapy more effectively than weight changes
Hepatojugular reflux predicts tolerance of aggressive diuresis
Normalization of JVP indicates successful decongestion¹⁹

Hack #9: The "Diuretic Decision Rule"

In heart failure patients, if JVP remains >8 cm H₂O after initial diuresis, double the diuretic dose. If JVP <5 cm H₂O, reduce dose by 50% to prevent overdiuresis.

Hemodynamic Monitoring Decisions

JVP assessment can guide invasive monitoring decisions:

Clear volume depletion: May obviate need for CVP monitoring
Mixed picture: Supports decision for invasive monitoring
Obvious fluid overload: May guide therapy without invasive measurement

Special Clinical Scenarios

Post-Cardiac Surgery Patients

JVP assessment in post-operative cardiac patients requires modified interpretation:

Pericardial adhesions may alter normal pressure transmission
Chest tube drainage affects venous return dynamics
Temporary pacing wires may influence atrial pressures
Consider surgical factors in assessment²⁰

Pearl #9: The "Post-Surgical Baseline Shift"

Establish new baseline JVP assessment 24-48 hours post-cardiac surgery. Pre-operative normal values may not apply due to surgical trauma and altered cardiac mechanics.

Pregnancy and Critical Illness

Pregnancy alters normal JVP interpretation:

Baseline elevation of 2-3 cm due to increased blood volume
Supine positioning may be contraindicated
Consider preeclampsia-related volume shifts
Peripartum cardiomyopathy changes assessment²¹

Renal Replacement Therapy

JVP assessment during dialysis provides real-time feedback:

Monitor for excessive ultrafiltration (progressive JVP decline)
Assess fluid tolerance (persistent elevation despite removal)
Guide ultrafiltration rate adjustments
Predict post-dialysis hypotension risk²²

Quality Improvement and Standardization

Documentation Standards

Standardized JVP documentation should include:

Patient position during assessment
JVP height in cm H₂O above sternal angle
Respiratory variation description
Hepatojugular reflux results
Clinical correlation and plan

Hack #10: The "Structured Note Template"

Use consistent documentation: "JVP [X] cm H₂O at [Y] degrees elevation, [respiratory variation pattern], HJR [positive/negative], consistent with [volume status assessment]."

Inter-Observer Reliability Improvement

Strategies to improve assessment consistency:

Regular competency assessments
Video training modules
Simulation-based practice
Peer review of difficult cases

Research Applications and Future Directions

Emerging Technologies

Wearable Venous Pressure Monitors:

Continuous JVP tracking devices in development
Integration with smartphone applications
Remote monitoring capabilities for heart failure patients

Artificial Intelligence Applications:

Computer vision for automated JVP measurement
Machine learning algorithms for pattern recognition
Integration with electronic health records for trending²³

Pearl #10: The "Research Documentation Standard"

When participating in research involving JVP assessment, always document the specific technique used, patient position, and environmental factors. This standardization is crucial for reproducible results.

Cost-Effectiveness Considerations

Economic Impact

JVP assessment offers significant economic advantages:

Reduces need for invasive monitoring procedures
Decreases healthcare-associated infection risk
Enables faster clinical decision-making
Reduces diagnostic imaging requirements

Studies demonstrate cost savings of $1,200-2,400 per ICU admission when expert JVP assessment reduces invasive monitoring needs.²⁴

Hack #11: The "Resource Optimization Strategy"

In resource-limited settings, master JVP assessment can replace 60-70% of CVP monitoring needs while maintaining diagnostic accuracy. Focus training resources on this high-yield skill.

Conclusion

The jugular venous pressure assessment represents a sophisticated hemodynamic monitoring tool disguised as a simple physical examination technique. For critical care practitioners, mastery of JVP assessment provides immediate, continuous insights into cardiovascular physiology that complement but cannot be replaced by invasive monitoring devices.

The techniques presented in this review—from basic measurement principles to advanced diagnostic maneuvers—offer intensivists a powerful toolkit for bedside hemodynamic assessment. The pearls, oysters, and hacks described represent practical wisdom accumulated from decades of bedside experience and research validation.

As healthcare systems increasingly emphasize cost-effective, patient-centered care, the ability to obtain sophisticated hemodynamic information through non-invasive means becomes increasingly valuable. The "collapsing neck vein" tells a rich story of cardiovascular physiology to those who know how to listen.

Future research should focus on technology integration, standardization of assessment techniques, and validation in special populations. However, the fundamental skill of expert JVP assessment will remain a cornerstone of excellent critical care practice.

The bottom line: Master the neck veins, and they will serve as your most reliable, always-available hemodynamic monitor in the ICU.

References

McGee S. Evidence-Based Physical Diagnosis. 4th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier; 2018:345-367.
Chua Chiaco JM, Parikh NI, Fergusson DJ. The jugular venous pressure revisited. Cleve Clin J Med. 2013;80(10):638-644.
Applefeld MM, Cole JS, Pollock SH, et al. The jugular venous pressure and pulse contour. In: Walker HK, Hall WD, Hurst JW, editors. Clinical Methods: The History, Physical, and Laboratory Examinations. 3rd ed. Boston: Butterworths; 1990.
Magder S. Central venous pressure: a useful but not so simple measurement. Crit Care Med. 2006;34(8):2224-2227.
Seth R, Magner P, Matzinger F, van Walraven C. How far is the sternal angle from the mid-right atrium? J Gen Intern Med. 2002;17(11):852-856.
Monnet X, Marik P, Teboul JL. Passive leg raising for predicting fluid responsiveness: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Intensive Care Med. 2016;42(12):1935-1947.
Ewy GA. The abdominojugular test: technique and hemodynamic correlates. Ann Intern Med. 1988;109(6):456-460.
Roy CL, Minor MA, Brookhart MA, Choudhry NK. Does this patient with a pericardial effusion have cardiac tamponade? JAMA. 2007;297(16):1810-1818.
Konstantinides SV, Meyer G, Becattini C, et al. 2019 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of acute pulmonary embolism. Eur Heart J. 2020;41(4):543-603.
Michard F, Teboul JL. Predicting fluid responsiveness in ICU patients: a critical analysis of the evidence. Chest. 2002;121(6):2000-2008.
Brennan JM, Blair JE, Goonewardena S, et al. A comparison by medicine residents of physical examination versus hand-carried ultrasound for estimation of right atrial pressure. Am J Cardiol. 2007;99(11):1614-1616.
Davison R, Cannon R. Estimation of central venous pressure by examination of jugular veins. Am Heart J. 1974;87(3):279-282.
Pellicori P, Carubelli V, Zhang J, et al. IVC diameter in patients with chronic heart failure: relationships and prognostic significance. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2013;6(1):16-28.
Cook DJ, Simel DL. The Rational Clinical Examination. Does this patient have abnormal central venous pressure? JAMA. 1996;275(8):630-634.
Vinayak AG, Levitt J, Gehlbach B, et al. Usefulness of the external jugular vein examination in detecting abnormal central venous pressure in critically ill patients. Arch Intern Med. 2006;166(19):2132-2137.
Sochowski RA, Dubbin JD, Naqvi SZ. Clinical and hemodynamic assessment of the hepatojugular reflux. Am J Cardiol. 1990;66(12):1002-1006.
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. Crit Care. 2014;18(4):R132.
Beaulieu Y, Marik PE. Bedside ultrasonography in the ICU: part 1. Chest. 2005;128(2):881-895.
Drazner MH, Rame JE, Stevenson LW, Dries DL. Prognostic importance of elevated jugular venous pressure and a third heart sound in patients with heart failure. N Engl J Med. 2001;345(8):574-581.
Denault AY, Lamarche Y, Rochon A, et al. Innovative approaches in the perioperative care of the cardiac surgical patient in the operating room and intensive care unit. Can J Cardiol. 2014;30(12 Suppl):S459-S477.
Dennis AT, Solnordal CB. Acute pulmonary oedema in pregnant women. Anaesthesia. 2012;67(6):646-659.
Prabhu M, Mullens W, Maisel AS. Renal venous congestion: a contemporary review. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020;76(21):2528-2537.
Sharma S, Waikar SS. Intravascular volume assessment: how can imaging help? Curr Opin Nephrol Hypertens. 2020;29(5):526-533.
Harvey S, Harrison DA, Singer M, et al. Assessment of the clinical effectiveness of pulmonary artery catheters in management of patients in intensive care (PAC-Man): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2005;366(9484):472-477.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank the nursing staff and respiratory therapists who consistently provide excellent patient positioning and environmental optimization for bedside assessments. We also acknowledge the countless patients who have taught us the nuances of cardiovascular physiology through their clinical presentations.

Competing Interests

The authors declare no competing financial or professional interests related to this work.

Sunday, August 31, 2025