Renal Venous Congestion and Cardiorenal Interactions

Renal perfusion requires blood to enter and leave the kidney. Arterial pressure and cardiac output describe important upstream conditions, but impaired drainage can disturb renal flow and filtration even when those conditions improve. This chapter follows pressure from the right heart into the renal veins, interstitium, and tubules, then connects those mechanisms to venous ultrasound, changing creatinine, and the evidence for decongestion strategies.

48.1 Congestion Describes a Pressure and Drainage Problem

Renal venous congestion develops when the venous environment impedes effective drainage and exposes the kidney to increased downstream pressure. Reduced arterial inflow and impaired venous drainage can coexist. A patient with right ventricular (RV) failure may have both low forward output and high systemic venous pressure, making a purely forward-versus-backward explanation artificial.

Congestion is related to fluid accumulation but is not identical to total-body volume excess. Venous pressure depends on blood volume relative to vascular capacity, venous tone, cardiac function, external pressure, and resistance along the drainage pathway. Redistribution of blood or a decline in RV function can raise venous pressure without a proportionate increase in total-body water.

Conversely, substantial interstitial fluid accumulation can coexist with limited effective circulating volume. Fluid moves between vascular and interstitial compartments, while changes in permeability, oncotic forces, and lymphatic drainage alter where it remains. Peripheral edema therefore does not directly measure intravascular filling or the ability to sustain further fluid removal.

The same distinction applies to fluid responsiveness. A preload-responsive circulation can increase stroke volume when preload rises. That response does not establish that the patient needs fluid or that the kidney and lungs can tolerate the associated pressure and volume changes. Responsiveness, clinical need, and tolerance are separate questions.

A congested patient can remain responsive, particularly when an impaired RV operates on a preload-dependent portion of its function curve. Additional volume might transiently increase output while further increasing venous and interstitial pressure. Conversely, volume removal might relieve drainage pressure yet reduce output if vascular refilling cannot sustain effective preload.

The useful starting question is therefore what limits organ perfusion now: insufficient inflow, excessive downstream pressure, a local obstruction, impaired cardiac function, or several processes together. Neither the appearance of edema nor a single pressure can answer that question alone.

48.2 CVP and Renal Venous Pressure Require a Common Reference

Central venous pressure (CVP) estimates pressure in the central venous compartment near the right atrium when the catheter and waveform are appropriate. Renal venous pressure is the pressure at the kidney’s outflow. The two are connected through a venous pathway, but hydrostatic differences, abdominal pressure, local compression, and flow resistance can separate them.

Pressure measurements also depend on reference height. In a fluid-filled system, lowering the transducer below the intended reference increases the displayed pressure. A vertical difference of 10 cm in a water-like fluid column corresponds to approximately 7.4 mm Hg. That difference is a measurement offset, not a change in the patient’s renal physiology. Position and transducer level must therefore be consistent when comparing measurements.

Subtracting CVP from mean arterial pressure (MAP) describes one systemic arterial–venous pressure separation. With illustrative values referenced consistently, MAP 75 mm Hg and CVP 10 give 75 − 10 = 65 mm Hg. If CVP rises to 20 while MAP remains 75, the descriptor falls to 55 mm Hg. This subtraction does not measure renal flow: local arterial pressure, renal venous pressure, resistance, and surrounding tissue pressure remain unspecified.

Respiration adds another layer. PEEP can raise measured CVP through pressure around the heart, changes in venous return, and altered RV loading. An externally transmitted component is still part of the actual intravascular pressure at that location. It cannot simply be discarded as an irrelevant artifact when considering transmission toward an extrathoracic organ.

What matters is how arterial, venous, and surrounding pressures change along the actual pathway. If they rise differently, local flow and vessel distension can change. If several pressures move together, a rise in CVP may have a different implication. Neither subtracting all PEEP nor applying a fixed correction resolves this mechanically complex relationship.

Compare pressure at a defined respiratory phase while checking effort, waveforms, position, and abdominal conditions. End-expiration improves consistency but does not remove external pressure or intrinsic PEEP.

48.3 Venous Pressure Can Alter Flow, Filtration, and Tissue Mechanics

When downstream venous pressure rises at unchanged renal arterial pressure, the available vascular pressure difference tends to narrow. If resistance were fixed and the pathway remained open, flow would fall. The living kidney adds active vascular responses and collapsible vessels, so the response is not a simple linear subtraction at every pressure.

Venous pressure can also raise postglomerular capillary hydrostatic pressure and alter fluid exchange with the interstitium. As interstitial pressure increases within a relatively constrained capsule, small veins, capillaries, and tubules can be compressed. The consequences include changed vascular resistance, altered tubular flow, and impaired regional oxygen access. The pressure–volume behavior depends on tissue compliance and the starting degree of edema.

Filtration can fall through several routes. Changes in arteriolar resistance alter glomerular capillary pressure. Increased pressure transmitted toward the tubular space can oppose filtration, while tissue injury can affect filtering capacity. Venous pressure, interstitial pressure, and Bowman’s-space pressure are related possibilities rather than identical measurements.

An illustrative Starling calculation isolates tubular back pressure. Suppose glomerular hydrostatic pressure is 55 mm Hg, Bowman’s-space pressure is 15, and the effective opposing oncotic difference is 30. Net filtering pressure is 55 − 15 − 30 = 10 mm Hg. If Bowman’s-space pressure increases to 20 while the other quantities remain fixed, net pressure becomes 5. This does not imply that a 5-mm Hg CVP rise produces a 5-mm Hg tubular rise; it shows why the tubular pressure matters.

Shimada and colleagues created unilateral congestion in rats by ligating the inferior vena cava between the renal veins. The congested kidney developed increased interstitial pressure, reduced flow and filtration, and tissue injury with regional hypoxia. This controlled model supports a causal contribution from impaired drainage, while its artificial obstruction cannot quantify every human cardiorenal state. 1

48.4 Abdominal Pressure and Lymphatic Drainage Modify the Tissue Response

The renal veins traverse an abdominal environment whose pressure can rise with ascites, visceral edema, distension, or external constraint. Increased abdominal pressure can impede venous drainage and compress the kidney or adjacent vascular pathways. Its circulatory effect may persist despite an apparently satisfactory cardiac output.

Harman and colleagues demonstrated this distinction in dogs with experimentally increased intra-abdominal pressure. Restoring cardiac output did not restore renal flow and filtration to their starting values, supporting an important local contribution. The experiment’s pressures and effect sizes are not human treatment thresholds. 2

In a small human cohort with advanced decompensated heart failure, Mullens and colleagues found that abdominal pressure and its change during treatment were associated with renal function. The findings connect the mechanical hypothesis to clinical observation, but treatment changed several processes together and the association does not isolate abdominal pressure as the sole cause. 3

Lymphatic drainage is another component of tissue fluid balance. Increased capillary filtration initially raises the fluid that lymphatics must remove. Higher interstitial pressure can help drive lymph formation and flow, providing compensation. However, rising pressure at lymphatic outflow and compression of collecting pathways can limit that compensation.

Rohn and colleagues cannulated renal lymphatics in dogs and varied venous and lymphatic outflow pressures. Their results showed that increased venous pressure raised interstitial fluid volume and pressure and changed the lymphatic pressure–flow relationship. The findings supported possible collecting-vessel compression; they did not show that lymph flow increases indefinitely as congestion worsens. 4

Thus edema depends on the balance between capillary fluid entry, lymphatic exit, and tissue accommodation. Increased interstitial pressure can oppose further capillary filtration while also impairing vulnerable structures. The capsule is part of this mechanical environment, but experimental decapsulation findings do not establish a clinical renal decompression treatment.

48.5 Cardiac Dysfunction and Sodium Retention Can Reinforce Each Other

RV failure can raise venous filling pressure while reducing forward flow. Pulmonary vascular loading, RV ischemia, and impaired contractility can all contribute. As RV volume and pressure increase, septal displacement and pericardial constraint can reduce LV filling, lowering forward output while systemic venous pressure remains high.

Tricuspid regurgitation adds backward pressure pulses during systole. Those pulses can propagate into the vena cava and organ veins, altering flow even when the mean pressure changes little. A persistent regurgitant lesion may therefore maintain abnormal venous waveforms despite a change in total volume. Its hemodynamic effect should not be reduced to a statement that a waveform is merely falsely positive.

Pericardial disease can raise filling pressures by restricting chamber expansion. Respiratory mechanics can similarly change the pressure surrounding the heart and the load against which the RV ejects. These processes explain why a high CVP does not identify one volume-based problem or one universally appropriate decongestive intervention.

The kidney then participates in the cycle. Reduced effective arterial filling can activate sympathetic, renin–angiotensin, and antidiuretic signals despite edema. These responses promote sodium and water retention. Reduced filtration can also reduce filtered sodium delivery, while altered tubular transport changes the balance between excretion and retention.

Retained sodium expands extracellular fluid over time and can increase venous pressure further when cardiac accommodation is limited. Abdominal and renal edema may add local drainage constraints. However, the hormonal and tubular response varies with disease stage, drugs, and the prevailing hemodynamics; congestion does not produce one identical renin response in every model or patient.

The feedback can be interrupted through different mechanisms, including improvement of cardiac performance, reduced vascular loading, redistribution, or removal of retained fluid. Their benefits and risks depend on what is driving the pressure state. The existence of a cycle does not prove that increasing or decreasing volume is always its best point of intervention.

48.6 Human Cohorts Establish Association Without Isolating One Cause

Human congestion studies support the importance of venous conditions alongside arterial supply. Mullens and colleagues followed patients with advanced decompensated heart failure undergoing invasive hemodynamic assessment. Higher CVP and persistent venous congestion were associated with worsening renal function, whereas changes in cardiac index explained less of the renal trajectory in that selected population. 5

Damman and colleagues examined a broader catheterization population of 2,557 cardiovascular patients. Higher CVP remained associated with lower estimated glomerular filtration rate (GFR) after adjustment and was associated with mortality. This supports the clinical relevance of venous pressure across cardiovascular conditions without proving that a particular pressure caused an individual filtration decline. 6

Several causal pathways can produce the same association. Severe heart disease can raise venous pressure and impair renal function through other mechanisms. Pre-existing renal disease can promote retention, increasing venous pressure in the reverse direction. Treatment intensity, vascular disease, inflammation, and baseline renal reserve can influence both measurements.

The renal endpoints also matter. Estimated GFR and a creatinine rise reflect filtration-marker behavior, not direct measurement of renal microvascular flow or tissue injury. Hemodynamic measurements are snapshots or serial samples taken under particular conditions, rather than continuous observation of every local pressure.

These limits do not make the findings uninformative. They show why arterial pressure and cardiac output alone are insufficient to explain renal function. Combined with direct experimental studies, the cohorts make a compelling case for considering drainage in the differential diagnosis.

The proper clinical inference is to look for a plausible congestive contribution and assess its consequences. The cohort relationship does not prescribe one CVP target, establish that all AKI is congestive, or prove that lowering CVP by any available method improves survival.

48.7 Organ Venous Doppler Shows Flow Timing Rather Than Pressure Alone

Venous Doppler measures blood velocity and its variation over time. In normally accommodating venous beds, local flow can remain relatively continuous despite pressure changes in the right atrium. Reduced vascular compliance or increased backward transmission can make organ venous flow more pulsatile or interrupt forward flow during part of the cardiac cycle.

In the hepatic veins, identify systolic and diastolic components relative to the electrocardiogram (ECG) and the direction of flow toward the right heart. Systolic reversal means blood moves backward during systole. Tricuspid regurgitation and atrial rhythm strongly influence this pattern; direct Doppler studies of valvular disease demonstrated the relationship. Screen position above or below the baseline is not itself an anatomical flow direction. 7

The portal circulation normally dampens much of this cardiac pulsatility. A useful descriptive quantity is the pulsatility fraction: maximum velocity minus minimum velocity, divided by maximum velocity. With illustrative forward velocities of 40 and 20 cm/s, the fraction is (40 − 20)/40 = 0.50, or 50%. It describes velocity variation within the sampled cycle, not a renal pressure or a percentage of damaged tissue.

Intrarenal venous Doppler samples interlobar venous flow, where continuous, biphasic discontinuous, and more restricted flow patterns can be observed. Iida and colleagues associated these patterns with right atrial pressure and subsequent outcomes in heart failure. Their study supports physiological and prognostic information without making the waveform a direct measurement of GFR or total renal blood flow (RBF). 8

Acquisition determines whether the pattern is interpretable. Confirm the vessel anatomically and with color Doppler, use settings sensitive to low venous velocities, avoid nearby arterial contamination, and record enough cycles to relate changes to rhythm and respiration. Avoid probe pressure that changes the vessel being examined. A missing or poor signal is not equivalent to absent venous flow.

48.8 VExUS Combines Findings but Does Not Measure Every Form of Fluid Intolerance

The venous excess ultrasound system, VExUS, combines vena-caval assessment with hepatic, portal, and intrarenal venous Doppler. Common grading approaches use the severity and distribution of abnormalities across sites to describe systemic venous congestion. The categories are classification rules, not measurements of intravascular liters or a direct manometer reading.

Beaubien-Souligny and colleagues developed the system using a cardiac-surgery cohort and found associations between a severe combined pattern and subsequent AKI. The original work was an exploratory analysis of a prospective cohort, rather than a treatment trial. Its population and measurement conditions matter when applying the score elsewhere. 9

Performance does not transfer automatically across populations. Andrei and colleagues found no significant association between early VExUS and AKI or mortality in a general ICU cohort. That result does not negate venous physiology; it limits treating one score as a universal predictor of a multifactorial syndrome. 10

Interpret each component before accepting the combined category. Tricuspid regurgitation, atrial fibrillation, pacing, altered respiratory pressure, and abdominal constraint can modify waveforms. Cirrhosis and portal vascular disease can alter transmission through the liver. Renal parenchymal disease, local vascular abnormalities, and poor acoustic access can complicate intrarenal assessment. A multi-organ score does not remove these confounders.

Venous congestion assessment also cannot certify pulmonary fluid tolerance. Lung water depends on pulmonary vascular pressure, barrier permeability, oncotic conditions, and lymphatic drainage. A patient with lung injury can develop pulmonary edema despite relatively reassuring systemic venous findings. Conversely, marked systemic congestion need not produce the same degree of pulmonary edema.

The 2026 USE-the-FORCE-for-AKI pilot combined lung ultrasound with venous assessment, rather than substituting one for the other. Lung findings identified concerns more often than VExUS in its noncritically ill AKI population. The combined method does not establish that a venous score alone measures pulmonary risk. 11

48.9 A Creatinine Rise During Decongestion Has Several Possible Meanings

Creatinine concentration can rise during a change in filtration without proving structural tubular injury. Changes in glomerular hemodynamics, effective circulating volume, distribution volume, and creatinine kinetics can all contribute. As Chapter 43 explains, the serum value follows production and elimination over time rather than displaying instantaneous GFR.

In a CARRESS-HF biomarker substudy of patients with preexisting worsening renal function, further creatinine worsening during intensive volume removal was associated with increases in tubular injury markers. Marker increases were also associated with greater decongestion and better creatinine recovery at 60 days. These exploratory associations within a selected trial cohort do not prove that a marker rise is harmless, establish structural injury from creatinine alone, or justify continued removal in every patient. 12

Persistent congestion and an isolated filtration-marker rise can therefore carry different implications from hypotension, worsening perfusion, severe electrolyte disturbance, or progressive multiorgan dysfunction during fluid removal. The trajectory of symptoms, venous findings, arterial perfusion, and renal function helps distinguish these patterns, although no combination provides perfect certainty.

Interpretation also depends on population. Findings from selected acute-heart-failure cohorts cannot automatically justify tolerating a creatinine rise in septic shock, active ischemia, or another evolving renal insult. Biomarker measurements are influenced by sampling, renal handling, timing, and the injury process studied.

The practical task is to explain the change rather than automatically declaring treatment failure or dismissing injury. Neither creatinine alone nor a reassuring venous trend determines whether the current balance of decongestion and perfusion remains appropriate.

48.10 Decongestion Trials Evaluate Strategies Rather Than Pressure Removal Alone

The physiological rationale for relieving drainage pressure does not establish that every method of fluid removal has the same effects. A strategy changes the rate and timing of vascular depletion, tissue refilling, sodium excretion, medication exposure, and systemic perfusion. These components can alter renal outcomes independently of the final amount of weight lost.

DOSE compared loop-diuretic administration and intensity strategies in acute decompensated heart failure. Its principal symptom and creatinine comparisons were not significantly different between assigned strategies, while a higher-intensity approach produced more diuresis and some favorable secondary measures alongside more transient worsening renal function. The trial does not make a short-term creatinine rise synonymous with irreversible injury or establish a universally superior administration method. 13

CARRESS-HF enrolled patients with persistent congestion and worsening renal function. The tested ultrafiltration strategy produced a greater creatinine rise at 96 hours than a stepped pharmacological strategy, despite similar weight loss, and had more adverse events. This comparison demonstrates that achieving volume loss does not guarantee equivalent renal consequences. It does not establish that all ultrafiltration in every setting is harmful. 14

Neither trial defined the benefit of treating to one CVP or VExUS value. Their results apply to the populations, comparators, and protocols tested. A plausible pressure-lowering mechanism cannot override an unfavorable clinical strategy result.

The general principle is to assess whether a change improves the combined state of tissue congestion and organ perfusion. Loss of edema, reduced venous pressure, maintained forward flow, and stable tissue function need not move together immediately. Detailed drug transport and renal replacement methods are developed in Chapters 49–51; their mechanisms should remain connected to the patient’s circulatory tolerance.

48.11 VExUS Intervention Evidence Now Includes Trials With Different Aims

Venous ultrasound has progressed beyond observational prediction. In a randomized trial of 140 patients with acute cardiorenal syndrome, VExUS-guided management improved decongestion measures but did not significantly improve the primary kidney-function-recovery outcome. Ninety-day survival was similar. The findings distinguish an effect on the treatment process from established renal or survival benefit. 15

The 2026 DRIUS pilot randomized 19 patients with septic shock. It demonstrated feasibility of providing VExUS-based management recommendations. The between-group fluid-balance comparison was not significant, and the small trial could not establish clinical efficacy from its secondary outcomes. Absence of a detected adverse-event difference in a feasibility sample does not establish safety across all critically ill populations. 16

USE-the-FORCE-for-AKI randomized 80 noncritically ill patients, with 79 included after one consent withdrawal. Its primary aim was feasibility, which was achieved. A combined lung-and-venous ultrasound report changed management and increased early diuretic use, without significant differences in several later fluid and clinical outcomes. This was a test of information supplied to clinicians, not an isolated VExUS target or a definitive outcome trial. 11

A small 2026 post-bypass report also described shorter hospital stay with VExUS guidance. Its design was inconsistently labeled randomized and observational, and accompanying management changes complicate attributing the result to the score. The reported signal warrants appropriately cautious interpretation rather than a general renal or survival claim. 17

These studies differ in disease, setting, ultrasound components, clinician recommendations, and outcomes. Their heterogeneity matters: a ward AKI feasibility strategy is not interchangeable with treatment of severe RV failure or septic shock. Greater diagnostic structure can change decisions without necessarily improving every patient-centered endpoint.

The available evidence therefore supports continued evaluation of structured venous assessment while preserving uncertainty about which management algorithm benefits which population. A high score supplies a physiological question and a possible marker for reassessment; it does not independently select the intervention or establish how far pressure and volume should fall.

48.12 Integrating Pressure, Flow, Congestion, and Renal Change

Consider an illustrative patient with RV dysfunction, tricuspid regurgitation, abdominal distension, and declining urine output. MAP is 75 mm Hg and consistently referenced CVP is 18. The systemic subtraction is 75 − 18 = 57 mm Hg. That number does not measure the renal gradient, but it highlights why adequate arterial pressure alone cannot describe the drainage environment.

Echocardiography shows RV dilatation and reduced forward stroke volume. Organ Doppler demonstrates hepatic systolic reversal and interrupted intrarenal venous flow. Together these findings support important right-heart and venous abnormalities. They do not prove that all renal dysfunction is caused by congestion, nor do they measure how many liters should be removed.

Check the comparison before acting on a trend. Confirm rhythm, respiratory effort, PEEP, position, transducer reference, Doppler quality, and abdominal conditions. Tricuspid regurgitation can maintain a systolic waveform abnormality even as other aspects of the circulation improve. Assess obstruction, exposures, and intrinsic renal disease alongside the congestive hypothesis.

Suppose subsequent management improves forward flow and the venous pattern becomes less interrupted. MAP is now 72 and CVP 12, giving 72 − 12 = 60 mm Hg. The arterial pressure has fallen slightly while the systemic arterial–venous separation has increased. This arithmetic illustrates why the direction of MAP alone can mislead; it does not prove an exact change in renal flow.

If creatinine rises modestly during this improvement, review its timing and the rest of the trajectory. Reduced edema and better flow have a different meaning from worsening hypotension, cool skin, increasing lactate, and progressive renal dysfunction. A favorable score cannot dismiss the latter findings, and a creatinine rise cannot independently establish the former treatment has failed.

The aim is to resolve the mechanism limiting organ function while preserving perfusion. Repeated measurements test whether that explanation remains coherent as the heart, venous circulation, tissues, and kidneys respond on different timescales.

References

1. Shimada S, Hirose T, Takahashi C, et al. Pathophysiological and molecular mechanisms involved in renal congestion in a novel rat model. Sci Rep. 2018;8:16808. doi:10.1038/s41598-018-35162-4

2. Harman PK, Kron IL, McLachlan HD, Freedlender AE, Nolan SP. Elevated intra-abdominal pressure and renal function. Ann Surg. 1982;196(5):594–597. doi:10.1097/00000658-198211000-00015

3. Mullens W, Abrahams Z, Skouri HN, et al. Elevated intra-abdominal pressure in acute decompensated heart failure: a potential contributor to worsening renal function? J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008;51(3):300–306. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2007.09.043

4. Rohn DA, Stewart RH, Elk JR, Laine GA, Drake RE. Renal lymphatic function following venous pressure elevation. Lymphology. 1996;29(2):67–75. PubMed

5. Mullens W, Abrahams Z, Francis GS, et al. Importance of venous congestion for worsening of renal function in advanced decompensated heart failure. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;53(7):589–596. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2008.05.068

6. Damman K, van Deursen VM, Navis G, Voors AA, van Veldhuisen DJ, Hillege HL. Increased central venous pressure is associated with impaired renal function and mortality in a broad spectrum of patients with cardiovascular disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;53(7):582–588. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2008.08.080

7. Sakai K, Nakamura K, Satomi G, Kondo M, Hirosawa K. Evaluation of tricuspid regurgitation by blood flow pattern in the hepatic vein using pulsed Doppler technique. Am Heart J. 1984;108(3 Pt 1):516–523. doi:10.1016/0002-8703(84)90417-4

8. Iida N, Seo Y, Sai S, et al. Clinical implications of intrarenal hemodynamic evaluation by Doppler ultrasonography in heart failure. JACC Heart Fail. 2016;4(8):674–682. doi:10.1016/j.jchf.2016.03.016

9. Beaubien-Souligny W, Rola P, Haycock K, et al. Quantifying systemic congestion with point-of-care ultrasound: development of the venous excess ultrasound grading system. Ultrasound J. 2020;12:16. doi:10.1186/s13089-020-00163-w

10. Andrei S, Bahr PA, Nguyen M, Bouhemad B, Guinot PG. Prevalence of systemic venous congestion assessed by Venous Excess Ultrasound Grading System (VExUS) and association with acute kidney injury in a general ICU cohort: a prospective multicentric study. Crit Care. 2023;27:224. doi:10.1186/s13054-023-04524-4

11. Gouin M, Huard K, Shen A, Côté JM, Denault A, Beaubien-Souligny W. A pilot randomized controlled trial of ultrasound evaluation of fluid tolerance for acute kidney injury: USE-the-FORCE-for-AKI trial. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2026;21(7):1126–1134. doi:10.2215/CJN.0000001059

12. Rao VS, Ahmad T, Brisco-Bacik MA, et al. Renal effects of intensive volume removal in heart failure patients with preexisting worsening renal function. Circ Heart Fail. 2019;12(6):e005552. doi:10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.118.005552

13. Felker GM, Lee KL, Bull DA, et al.; Heart Failure Clinical Research Network. Diuretic strategies in patients with acute decompensated heart failure. N Engl J Med. 2011;364(9):797–805. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1005419

14. Bart BA, Goldsmith SR, Lee KL, et al.; Heart Failure Clinical Research Network. Ultrafiltration in decompensated heart failure with cardiorenal syndrome. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(24):2296–2304. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1210357

15. Islas-Rodríguez JP, Miranda-Aquino T, Romero-González G, et al. Effect on kidney function recovery guiding decongestion with VExUS in patients with cardiorenal syndrome 1: a randomized control trial. Cardiorenal Med. 2024;14(1):1–11. doi:10.1159/000535641

16. Innes B, Allison C, Seidler N, et al. Deresuscitation informed by ultrasound in patients with septic shock trial: a pilot randomized controlled study. J Ultrasound Med. 2026;45(8):1685–1693. doi:10.1002/jum.70219

17. Guo L, Gong W, Zhang H, Gu H, Li Q. Clinical value of the venous volume excess ultrasound score (VExUS) for volume management following cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). J Ultrasound. 2026;29(3):663–670. doi:10.1007/s40477-026-01200-5