Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39589643›Full record

ArticleThe ultrasound journal2024

VExUS: common misconceptions, clinical use and future directions.

Philippe Rola, Korbin Haycock, Rory Spiegel, William Beaubien-Souligny, Andre Denault

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The ultrasound journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Physiological Considerations in POCUS-Based Hemodynamic Assessment.Journal of ultrasound in medicine : official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. The rise of point-of-care ultrasound in cardiopulmonary diagnostics.European heart journal. Imaging methods and practice · 2026
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Philippe RolaAssistant Professor, University of Montreal, Chief of Service, Intensive Care Unit Santa Cabrini Hospital, CEMTL, Montreal, Canada. philipperola@gmail.com.
Korbin HaycockAssistant Professor, Loma Linda University, School of Medicine, Loma Linda, USA.
Rory SpiegelDepartments of critical care and emergency medicine, Medstar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, SC, USA.
William Beaubien-SoulignyInnovation hub, Centre de recherche du Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, Montréal, Quebec, Canada.
Andre DenaultDépartement d'anesthésiologie et de médecine de la douleur, Directeur du programme de Fellowship en échographie ciblée, Institut de Cardiologie de Montréal, Montreal, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There has been a significant interest in venous congestion in recent years, among which the VExUS score has been prominent, both in clinical practice and research efforts. We have noted some recurrent misconceptions among clinicians which are also reflected in certain research efforts. Notably, the misguided attempt to correlate VExUS to volume status, which is only one of the factors influencing it, as well as attempts to re-interpret VExUS in the context of certain pathologies, which reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of its circulatory perspective. In this article we review the physiological basis of the VExUS assessment as a measure and marker of venous congestion from the organs' standpoint and its role as part of the emerging concept of fluid tolerance, in hopes to address these misconceptions for clinicians and for important further studies.

Identifiers

PMID39589643
PMCPMC11599660

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.