Observational studyPloS one2026
Longitudinal ultrasound assessment of jugular venous pressure reliably detects hypervolemia: An observational study in healthy volunteers.
Observational study in PloS one, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUltrasound (US) assessment of the internal jugular vein (IJV) to measure ultrasound jugular venous pressure (uJVP) has been proposed as a promising non-invasive tool for evaluating hydration status. However, a standardized method for uJVP measurement is currently lacking.
methodsThis cross-sectional study compared 4 previously described IJV-US methods in healthy, euvolemic volunteers. Methods 1 and 2 use transverse view, measuring uJVP where IJV is (1)smaller than common carotid artery or (2)collapsed throughout the respiratory cycle. Methods 3a/b use longitudinal view, measuring at the tip(3a) or base(3b) of the IJV tapering portion. US assessment was conducted by 2 independent, blinded investigators at individualized head-of-bed elevation angle according to standardized procedures. Endpoints were: a)percentage of participants with measurements differing >1 standard deviation(SD) from the previously described mean (6.5 ± 1.5 cmH₂O) for euvolemic patients, b)reproducibility and c)feasibility.
results30 participants(50% females) were included. Median uJVP(IQR) was 3.8 cmH₂O(3.0-4.0), 4.5 cmH₂O(3.8-5.3), 3.9 cmH₂O(3.3-4.5), and 3.3 cmH₂O(2.8-3.5) for methods 1-3b. uJVP differed >1SD in 17/30(56.7%), 3/14(21.4%), 14/29(51.7%) and 25/30available assessment pairs(83.3%), respectively. Reproducibility for methods 1-3b was 18/30(60.0%), 7/30(23.3%), 19/30(63.3%) and 25/30 participants(83.3%). Assessment was feasible in 30/30 participants(100%) for methods 1 and 3b, 29/30(97%) for method 3a and 14/30(47%) for method 2.
conclusionThe longitudinal method measuring uJVP at the base of tapering portion showed the highest reproducibility and feasibility. Overall, measured uJVP values were consistently within the upper threshold for normal central venous pressure, but lower than the previously described values, supporting the use of uJVP for detecting hypervolemia, but not hypovolemia.
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.