Point-of-Care Ultrasound for Evaluation of Hypotensive
Patients in the Intensive Care Unit: A Systematic Approach
Abstract
Introduction
Pathophysiology of
Shock and Rationale for POCUS Evaluation
Shock is defined as inadequate tissue perfusion and oxygenation due to circulatory failure, resulting in cellular and organ dysfunction. Traditionally, shock is categorized into four types: hypovolemic, cardiogenic, obstructive, and distributive[7]. In the ICU setting, patients often present with mixed shock states, making diagnosis and management challenging.
- Portable and easily accessible
- Equipped with cardiac, abdominal, and linear transducers
- Capable of Doppler imaging (color, pulse-wave, and
continuous-wave)
- Able to store images for documentation and review
- Network-connected for consultation and quality assurance
purposes
1. Phased array (cardiac) transducer (2-5 MHz): Primary
probe for cardiac and IVC assessment.
2. Curvilinear (abdominal) transducer (3-5 MHz): Used for
abdominal assessment, including the aorta, FAST examination, and alternative
views of the IVC.
3. Linear (vascular) transducer (7-12 MHz): Used for lung
ultrasound and vascular access.
To obtain high-quality images in the ICU setting:
- Adjust depth to visualize structures of interest
- Optimize gain to balance image brightness
- Adjust focus to enhance resolution at the desired depth
- Use harmonic imaging to reduce artifact
- Select appropriate probe presets for the intended
application
- Utilize respiratory variation to enhance visualization of
certain structures
2. Adjust depth to include all cardiac structures
3. Evaluate:
- Left ventricular
(LV) size and systolic function
- Right ventricular
(RV) size (RV:LV ratio)
- Pericardial
effusion
- Gross valvular
abnormalities (mitral and aortic valves)
- Left atrial size
1. From the PLAX position, rotate the probe 90° clockwise
2. Obtain views at multiple levels:
- Aortic valve
level: Evaluate aortic valve, right ventricular outflow tract, and pulmonary
valve
- Mitral valve
level: Assess mitral valve morphology and motion
- Papillary muscle
level: Evaluate LV systolic function, wall motion, and interventricular septum
3. Look for:
- Regional wall
motion abnormalities
- RV dilation and
septal flattening
- LV systolic
function (qualitative assessment)
1. Place the probe at the point of maximal impulse, with the
indicator pointing toward the patient's left
2. Evaluate:
- Biventricular
size and function
- Atrial size
- Valvular function
(mitral and tricuspid)
- Presence of
pericardial effusion
3. Add color Doppler to assess for valvular regurgitation
4. Obtain tissue Doppler imaging of the mitral annulus for
diastolic function assessment when appropriate
1. Position the probe below the xiphoid process, angling
toward the heart
2. Evaluate:
- Pericardial
effusion (particularly sensitive view)
- RV size and
function
- IVC diameter and
respiratory variation (by rotating probe toward patient's right)
3. This view is particularly valuable in patients with poor
acoustic windows or when other views are unobtainable
Step 2: Volume Status
Assessment ("The Tank")
1. Use the subcostal view to visualize the IVC as it enters
the right atrium
2. Measure the maximum diameter during expiration at 1-2 cm
from the IVC-right atrial junction
3. Assess respiratory variation:
- >50% collapse
during spontaneous respiration suggests hypovolemia
- <50% collapse
with a dilated IVC (>2.1 cm) suggests elevated right atrial pressure
4. Note limitations in mechanically ventilated patients and
those with increased intra-abdominal pressure
FAST (Focused
Assessment with Sonography in Trauma) Examination
While originally developed for trauma, elements of the FAST
exam are valuable in assessing hypotensive ICU patients:
1. Hepatorenal space (Morrison's pouch): Check for free
fluid or hepatic congestion
2. Splenorenal space: Evaluate for free fluid
3. Pelvic view: Assess for free fluid in the pouch of
Douglas
4. Pericardial view: Look for effusion (already covered in
cardiac assessment)
Step 3: Lung
Ultrasound
Lung ultrasound provides crucial information about pulmonary and pleural pathology that may contribute to or result from shock:
2. At each location, evaluate for:
- A-lines (normal
horizontal reverberation artifacts)
- B-lines (vertical
"comet-tail" artifacts indicating alveolar-interstitial syndrome)
- Pleural effusions
- Consolidation
- Pneumothorax
(absence of lung sliding, presence of stratosphere sign on M-mode)
- Multiple B-lines
bilaterally: Pulmonary edema (cardiogenic shock or volume overload)
- Consolidation
with air bronchograms: Pneumonia (potential source in septic shock)
- Pleural effusion:
May indicate heart failure, hypoalbuminemia, or pleural infection
- Pneumothorax:
Possible cause of obstructive shock
- A-profile with
lung sliding: Normal lung aeration (seen in hypovolemic or early distributive
shock)
2. Measure the maximum diameter in the transverse plane
3. An aortic diameter >3 cm warrants further evaluation
for aneurysmal disease
4. Look for a dissection flap, intramural hematoma, or
rupture with associated retroperitoneal fluid
2. Apply gentle pressure with the linear transducer
3. Non-compressible vein indicates thrombus
4. When combined with cardiac findings of RV strain, a
positive DVT study strongly suggests PE as the cause of shock
Hypovolemic Shock
- Small, hyperdynamic LV
- Small or normal RV
- IVC collapse >50% with spontaneous respiration
- Flat jugular veins (if visualized)
- Normal lung sliding with A-lines predominance
- Potential evidence of blood loss (intraperitoneal fluid,
retroperitoneal hemorrhage)
- Reduced LV systolic function (global or regional)
- B-lines on lung ultrasound suggesting pulmonary edema
- Dilated, minimally collapsible IVC
- Potential valvular pathology
- Potential mechanical complications (ventricular septal
rupture, papillary muscle rupture)
Cardiac tamponade:
- Pericardial effusion with right atrial and/or ventricular
diastolic collapse
- Dilated IVC with minimal respiratory variation
- Plethoric hepatic veins
- RV dilation and dysfunction (RV:LV ratio >1)
- McConnell's sign (RV free wall hypokinesis with preserved
apical contractility)
- Interventricular septal flattening or paradoxical motion
- Dilated IVC
- Potential evidence of DVT
- Absent lung sliding
- Stratosphere sign on M-mode
- Lung point (specific for pneumothorax)
- Contralateral mediastinal shift
Distributive Shock
- Hyperdynamic LV (early septic shock)
- Normal or reduced LV function (late or sepsis-induced
cardiomyopathy)
- Normal or small IVC with respiratory variation
- Potential source of infection (pneumonia, intra-abdominal
abscess)
- Variable B-line pattern on lung ultrasound
Mixed Shock States
Many ICU patients present with elements of multiple shock
types. POCUS allows real-time assessment of the predominant mechanism and
guidance of therapy. For example:
- A septic patient (distributive shock) with preexisting
heart failure (cardiogenic component)
- A patient with cardiogenic shock who develops sepsis from
ventilator-associated pneumonia
- A trauma patient with hypovolemic shock who develops
cardiac dysfunction from blunt cardiac injury
POCUS-Guided
Hemodynamic Management
Several POCUS techniques can predict fluid responsiveness:
POCUS findings can inform vasopressor choice:
- Patients with RV dysfunction may benefit from pulmonary
vasodilators and avoiding agents that increase pulmonary vascular resistance
- Patients with normal cardiac function and distributive
physiology may benefit from pure vasoconstrictors (e.g., norepinephrine,
vasopressin)
Beyond diagnostic applications, POCUS facilitates safe
performance of procedures in hypotensive patients:
- Central venous catheter placement
- Arterial line insertion
- Pericardiocentesis
- Thoracentesis
- Paracentesis
- Endotracheal tube placement confirmation
Implementation and
Training Considerations
Achieving competency in POCUS for shock assessment requires:
2. Hands-on training with expert supervision
3. Performance of a minimum number of examinations
(typically 25-50 per application)
4. Ongoing quality assurance and continuing education
Quality assurance programs should include:
1. Image archiving and documentation
2. Regular review of challenging cases
3. Comparison with comprehensive studies when available
4. Correlation of POCUS findings with clinical outcomes
5. Peer review and feedback
Integration into
Clinical Workflow
Successful integration of POCUS into ICU practice requires:
2. Standardized protocols
3. Clear documentation systems
4. Educational resources for providers at various skill
levels
5. Established mechanisms for obtaining advanced studies
when POCUS findings are inadequate or uncertain
- Poor acoustic windows (obesity, subcutaneous emphysema,
chest wall dressings)
- Limited field of view
- Operator dependency
- Time constraints in rapidly deteriorating patients
- Distinguishing chronic from acute findings
- Integrating conflicting or ambiguous findings
- Recognizing limitations of qualitative assessments
- Accurately interpreting findings in complex patients with
multiple comorbidities
- Misinterpreting pleural effusion as pericardial effusion
- Failing to recognize diastolic dysfunction
- Over-reliance on IVC assessment in patients with
conditions affecting right heart filling
- Misattribution of regional wall motion abnormalities
- Failure to recognize limitations of the technique in
specific patient populations
Emerging Applications
and Future Directions
- Strain imaging for subclinical myocardial dysfunction
- 3D echocardiography at the bedside
- Automated interpretation systems using artificial
intelligence
- Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography for perfusion assessment
- Wireless and patch ultrasound devices for continuous
monitoring
- Combining POCUS with invasive hemodynamic monitoring
- Integration with electronic health records and clinical
decision support systems
- Teleultrasound for remote expert consultation
- Validation of POCUS-guided resuscitation protocols
- Development of standardized assessment tools
- Evaluation of impact on patient outcomes
- Cost-effectiveness analyses
- Studies on specific patient populations (e.g., morbid
obesity, ARDS)
Point-of-care ultrasound has transformed the assessment and management of hypotensive patients in the ICU. By providing immediate visualization of cardiac function, volume status, and potential causes of shock, POCUS enables rapid diagnosis and targeted interventions. The systematic approach outlined in this review offers a practical framework for implementing POCUS in the evaluation of shock.
1. Volpicelli G, Lamorte A, Tullio M, et al. Point-of-care
multiorgan ultrasonography for the evaluation of undifferentiated hypotension
in the emergency department. Intensive Care Med. 2013;39(7):1290-1298.
2. Seif D, Perera P, Mailhot T, Riley D, Mandavia D. Bedside
ultrasound in resuscitation and the rapid ultrasound in shock protocol. Crit
Care Res Pract. 2012;2012:503254.
3. Expert Round Table on Ultrasound in ICU. International
expert statement on training standards for critical care ultrasonography.
Intensive Care Med. 2011;37(7):1077-1083.
4. Levitov A, Frankel HL, Blaivas M, et al. Guidelines for
the appropriate use of bedside general and cardiac ultrasonography in the
evaluation of critically ill patients-part II: cardiac ultrasonography. Crit
Care Med. 2016;44(6):1206-1227.
5. Zieleskiewicz L, Muller L, Lakhal K, et al. Point-of-care
ultrasound in intensive care units: assessment of 1073 procedures in a
multicentric, prospective, observational study. Intensive Care Med.
2015;41(9):1638-1647.
6. Bernier-Jean A, Albert M, Shiloh AL, Eisen LA, Williamson
D, Benitez D. The diagnostic and therapeutic impact of point-of-care
ultrasonography in the intensive care unit. J Intensive Care Med.
2017;32(3):197-203.
7. Vincent JL, De Backer D. Circulatory shock. N Engl J Med.
2013;369(18):1726-1734.
8. Perera P, Mailhot T, Riley D, Mandavia D. The RUSH exam:
Rapid Ultrasound in SHock in the evaluation of the critically ill. Emerg Med
Clin North Am. 2010;28(1):29-56.
9. Manno E, Navarra M, Faccio L, et al. Deep impact of
ultrasound in the intensive care unit: the "ICU-sound" protocol.
Anesthesiology. 2012;117(4):801-809.
10. Moore CL, Copel JA. Point-of-care ultrasonography. N
Engl J Med. 2011;364(8):749-757.
11. Leidi A, Rouyer F, Marti C, et al. Point of care
ultrasonography from the emergency department to the internal medicine ward:
current trends and perspectives. Intern Emerg Med. 2020;15(3):395-408.
12. Weingart SD, Duque D, Nelson B. The RUSH exam: Rapid
Ultrasound for Shock and Hypotension. 2009. Available at:
http://www.emcrit.org/rush-exam. Accessed September 10, 2023.
13. Mayo PH, Beaulieu Y, Doelken P, et al. American College
of Chest Physicians/La Société de Réanimation de Langue Française statement on competence
in critical care ultrasonography. Chest. 2009;135(4):1050-1060.
14. Via G, Hussain A, Wells M, et al. International
evidence-based recommendations for focused cardiac ultrasound. J Am Soc
Echocardiogr. 2014;27(7):683.e1-683.e33.
15. Lichtenstein DA. BLUE-protocol and FALLS-protocol: two
applications of lung ultrasound in the critically ill. Chest.
2015;147(6):1659-1670.
16. Schmidt GA, Koenig S, Mayo PH. Shock: ultrasound to
guide diagnosis and therapy. Chest. 2012;142(4):1042-1048.
17. Vieillard-Baron A, Millington SJ, Sanfilippo F, et al. A
decade of progress in critical care echocardiography: a narrative review.
Intensive Care Med. 2019;45(6):770-788.
18. Lamperti M, Bodenham AR, Pittiruti M, et al.
International evidence-based recommendations on ultrasound-guided vascular
access. Intensive Care Med. 2012;38(7):1105-1117.
19. Díaz-Gómez JL, Mayo PH, Koenig SJ. Point-of-care
ultrasonography. N Engl J Med. 2021;385(17):1593-1602.
20. Jensen MB, Sloth E, Larsen KM, Schmidt MB. Transthoracic
echocardiography for cardiopulmonary monitoring in intensive care. Eur J
Anaesthesiol. 2004;21(9):700-707.
21. Hussain A, Malik A, Amir M, Amir R. The RUSH protocol: A
novel systematic approach to the adult hypotensive patient. J Emerg Trauma
Shock. 2018;11(2):104-110.
22. Volpicelli G, Elbarbary M, Blaivas M, et al.
International evidence-based recommendations for point-of-care lung ultrasound.
Intensive Care Med. 2012;38(4):577-591.
23. Narasimhan M, Koenig SJ, Mayo PH. Advanced
echocardiographic techniques in the critically ill patient. Semin Respir Crit
Care Med. 2014;35(5):566-577.
24. Monnet X, Marik PE, Teboul JL. Prediction of fluid
responsiveness: an update. Ann Intensive Care. 2016;6(1):111.
25. Denault A, Vegas A, Royse C. Bedside clinical and
ultrasound-based approaches to the management of hemodynamic instability—part
I: focus on the clinical approach and ultrasound techniques. Semin Cardiothorac
Vasc Anesth. 2014;18(3):228-240.
26. Ferrada P, Murthi S, Anand RJ, Bochicchio GV, Scalea T.
Transthoracic focused rapid echocardiographic examination: real-time evaluation
of fluid status in critically ill trauma patients. J Trauma. 2011;70(1):56-64.
27. Beaulieu Y. Bedside echocardiography in the assessment
of the critically ill. Crit Care Med. 2007;35(5 Suppl):S235-S249.
28. Cholley BP, Vieillard-Baron A, Mebazaa A.
Echocardiography in the ICU: time for widespread use! Intensive Care Med.
2006;32(1):9-10.
29. Jones AE, Tayal VS, Sullivan DM, Kline JA. Randomized,
controlled trial of immediate versus delayed goal-directed ultrasound to
identify the cause of nontraumatic hypotension in emergency department
patients. Crit Care Med. 2004;32(8):1703-1708.
30. Kanji HD, McCallum J, Sirounis D, MacRedmond R, Moss R, Boyd JH. Limited echocardiography-guided therapy in subacute shock is associated with change in management and improved outcomes. J Crit Care. 2014;29(5):700-705.
