ArticleJournal of clinical monitoring and computing2026
Peripheral intravenous waveform analysis for evaluating volume status in healthy volunteers and mechanically ventilated patients.
Article in Journal of clinical monitoring and computing, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Timely diagnosis of blood loss and evaluation of intravascular volume status are pivotal tasks in clinical practice. Recent studies in animals and during lower body negative pressure (LBNP) in humans indicate that peripheral intravenous pressure waveform analysis (PIVA) may detect early stages of blood loss. As PIVA only requires a peripheral venous cannula, it may have value in emergency settings. However, its clinical relevance remains uncertain. This study examined how volume changes affect the PIVA-derived fundamental frequency (PIVAF1). Two cohorts were studied. The LBNP cohort comprised 15 healthy volunteers exposed to simulated blood loss in 10 mmHg increments of LBNP every two minutes from 0 to 80 mmHg, or until hemodynamic decompensation. The general anesthesia (GA)-cohort included 20 patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery who underwent preload increase with a head-down tilt. Peripheral intravenous pressure waveforms were continuously recorded from an antecubital vein and analyzed using short-time Fourier transform to extract the amplitude at the heart-rate frequency (PIVAF1). Changes in PIVAF1 were analyzed using linear regression. In the LBNP-cohort, data were log(e) – transformed and associated with a change per LBNP level of -0.11 (95% CI -0.14 to -0.09, P < 0.001). In the GA-cohort, PIVAF1 did not reliably predict a 10% change in stroke volume with head-down tilt [AUC 0.71 (95% CI 0.47 to 0.96; P = 0.11)]. We found statistically significant reductions in PIVAF1 during simulated blood loss but PIVAF1 did not predict increasing stroke volume during head-down tilt in general anesthesia. The clinical significance of PIVA remains to be elucidated.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.