Logo-jrip
J Renal Inj Prev. 2026;15(4): e38775.
doi: 10.34172/jrip.38775
  Abstract View: 20582
  PDF Download: 14942

Original

Comparison of inferior vena cava indices as markers of volume status in hemodialysis patients and healthy individuals; a case–control study

Sepideh Hajian 1 ORCID logo, Majid Hajikarimi 2 ORCID logo, Pourya Fathollahzadeh 3,4 ORCID logo, Sadaf Rahgodaz 3,4 ORCID logo, Arian Ghannadi Karimi 5,6 ORCID logo, Niki Sadat Mosallaei 7 ORCID logo, Mohammad Taghipour 2* ORCID logo

1 Department of Nephrology, Velayat Clinical Research Development Unit, Qazvin University of Medical Sciences, Qazvin, Iran
2 Department of Cardiology, Faculty of Medicine, Bouali Hospital, Qazvin University of Medical Sciences, Qazvin, Iran
3 Student Research Committee, Qazvin University of Medical Sciences, Qazvin, Iran
4 USERN Office, Qazvin University of Medical Sciences, Qazvin, Iran
5 Preclinical, Cardiovascular Imaging Core Facility, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
6 School of Medicine, Qazvin University of Medical Sciences, Qazvin, Iran
7 Hannover Medical School, Faculty of Medicine, Carl-Neuberg-Straße 1, 30625 Hannover, Germany
*Corresponding Author: Mohammad Taghipour, Email: dr.mtaghipourcardio@gmail.com

Abstract

Introduction: Volume status assessment is critical in hemodialysis (HD) patients because fluid overload is closely related to cardiovascular complications and mortality. Inferior vena cava (IVC) diameter and collapsibility measured by ultrasound provide simple noninvasive estimates of intravascular volume, but comparative data versus healthy individuals are limited.

Objectives: This study therefore compares IVC indices between HD patients and healthy controls to evaluate their usefulness as markers of volume status in clinical practice.

Materials and Methods: This case–control study included 53 maintenance HD patients and 48 age- and sex-matched healthy controls recruited at Qazvin Velayat hospital between December 2024 and September 2025. Demographic and anthropometric data were recorded, and all participants underwent multi-frequency bioimpedance analysis and standardized ultrasonographic assessment of IVC diameters (maximum and minimum) and collapsibility index (categorical < 50% versus > 50%). Statistical comparisons between HD and control groups, as well as regression analyses of the association between HD status and IVC indices, were performed using SPSS version 27.

Results: Among the evaluated markers of volume status, HD status was associated with larger IVC diameters and reduced collapsibility compared with healthy individuals. In linear regression models, HD was associated with an increase of 4.02 mm in maximum IVC diameter (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.76–5.27) and 4.29 mm in minimum diameter (95% CI: 2.86–5.71). In addition, in logistic regression analysis, HD patients had higher odds of having a collapsibility index below 50%, with an odds ratio of 3.07 (95% CI: 1.24–7.62), indicating a substantially greater likelihood of reduced vena cava collapsibility in this group.

Conclusion: These results indicate that HD patients have a pattern of larger IVC diameters and reduced collapsibility compared with healthy individuals, supporting IVC ultrasound indices as practical noninvasive markers of volume overload in this population.


Implication for health policy/practice/research/medical education:

The results demonstrated that hemodialysis status emerged as a predictor of altered inferior vena cava (IVC) geometry and dynamics compared with healthy individuals, being significantly associated with larger maximum and minimum IVC diameters as well as a lower collapsibility index, which together reflect a relatively higher intravascular volume state and diminished respiratory variation in venous return among patients receiving hemodialysis.

Please cite this paper as: Hajian S, Hajikarimi M, Fathollahzadeh P, Rahgodaz S, Ghannadi Karimi A, Sadat Mosallaei N, Taghipour M. Comparison of inferior vena cava indices as markers of volume status in hemodialysis patients and healthy individuals; a case–control study. J Renal Inj Prev. 2026; 15(4): e38775. doi: 10.34172/jrip.38775.

First Name
Last Name
Email Address
Comments
Security code


Abstract View:

Your browser does not support the canvas element.

PDF Download:

Your browser does not support the canvas element.


Full Text View:

Your browser does not support the canvas element.