Definition and research guide
This page combines a MeSH definition, publication statistics and selected research abstracts. It is a starting point for reading the literature, not a medical textbook or a systematic evidence review.
Content available: 4 complete abstracts (965 words), 10 references. Full article text is not stored or reproduced here; follow the PMID, DOI or PMC links to read the original sources and their access terms.
Definition
The blood pressure in the central large veins of the body. It is distinguished from peripheral venous pressure which occurs in an extremity.
Definition: NLM Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) scope note (Public domain (U.S. National Library of Medicine); attribution requested). View the MeSH record.
Also known as: Venous Pressure, Central; Central Venous Pressures; Pressure, Central Venous; Pressures, Central Venous; Venous Pressures, Central.
Where it fits in the MeSH classification
- Broader topics
- Venous Pressure
Related concepts
- Veins
Research landscape
PubMed indexes 4,813 records tagged with the MeSH heading “Central Venous Pressure” (counts retrieved 2026-10-29). 310 of them (6.4%) were published from 2020 onward, and the busiest period so far is through 1999 with 3,115 records.
Reviews account for 284 records (5.9%) and meta-analyses for 21. Randomized controlled trials number 219 (4.6%) as a share of all records on the topic.
Show the data
| Period | Records |
|---|---|
| through 1999 | 3,115 |
| 2000-2009 | 603 |
| 2010-2019 | 785 |
| 2020 onward | 310 |
Publication-type chart data
| Type | Records | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Reviews | 284 | 5.9% |
| Meta-analyses | 21 | 0.4% |
| Randomized controlled trials | 219 | 4.6% |
Method: PubMed query "Central Venous Pressure"[MeSH Terms] with publication-type and date filters, retrieved 2026-10-29.
Reading the evidence in cardiovascular medicine
Cardiovascular medicine has an unusually large body of randomized trials, so the type of outcome matters: hard clinical events such as death, heart attack and stroke carry more weight than changes in blood pressure, cholesterol or imaging markers that only predict risk. Observational studies can show associations but are confounded by age, lifestyle and other illness. Check whether a result is about prevention or treatment, the baseline risk of participants, and the absolute rather than only the relative size of any benefit.
Evidence from open-access studies
These open-access studies come from PubMed’s best-match results for this heading (papers whose main topic it is), ranked here by citation count, with one recent addition. Each abstract is reproduced in full under its recorded open licence so that you can read the authors’ own words. They illustrate the literature; they are not a systematic summary of it. Citation counts measure attention, not reliability or clinical benefit.
The efficacy of sonographic measurement of inferior vena cava diameter as an estimate of central venous pressure [1]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- BackgroundCentral venous pressure (CVP) and right atrial pressure (RAP) are important parameters in the complete hemodynamic assessment of a patient.
- Closing excerpt
- Given the ease, safety, and availability of this non-invasive technique, broader adoption and application of this method in clinical settings is warranted.
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (231 words)
BackgroundCentral venous pressure (CVP) and right atrial pressure (RAP) are important parameters in the complete hemodynamic assessment of a patient. Sonographic measurement of the inferior vena cava (IVC) diameter is a non-invasive method of estimating these parameters, but there are limited data summarizing its diagnostic accuracy across multiple studies. We performed a comprehensive review of the existing literature to examine the diagnostic accuracy and clinical utility of sonographic measurement of IVC diameter as a method for assessing CVP and RAP.MethodsWe performed a systematic search using PubMed of clinical studies comparing sonographic evaluation of IVC diameter and collapsibility against gold standard measurements of CVP and RAP. We included clinical studies that were performed in adults, used current imaging techniques, and were published in English.ResultsTwenty one clinical studies were identified that compared sonographic assessment of IVC diameter with CVP and RAP and met all inclusion criteria. Despite substantial heterogeneity in measurement techniques and patient populations, most studies demonstrated moderate strength correlations between measurements of IVC diameter and collapsibility and CVP or RAP, but more favorable diagnostic accuracy using pre-specified cut points. Findings were inconsistent among mechanically ventilated patients, except in the absence of positive end-expiratory pressure.ConclusionSonographic measurement of IVC diameter and collapsibility is a valid method of estimating CVP and RAP. Given the ease, safety, and availability of this non-invasive technique, broader adoption and application of this method in clinical settings is warranted.
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 27542597 · DOI · PMC4992235
Low mean perfusion pressure is a risk factor for progression of acute kidney injury in critically ill patients - A retrospective analysis [2]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- BackgroundThe aim was to investigate whether mean perfusion pressure (MPP) calculated as the difference between mean arterial pressure (MAP) and central venous pressure (CVP) was associated with risk of progression from AKI I to AKI III in critically ill patients.
- Closing excerpt
- CVP was the key component of MPP.
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (257 words)
BackgroundThe aim was to investigate whether mean perfusion pressure (MPP) calculated as the difference between mean arterial pressure (MAP) and central venous pressure (CVP) was associated with risk of progression from AKI I to AKI III in critically ill patients.MethodsRetrospective analysis of adult patients admitted to a multi-disciplinary adult intensive care unit (ICU) between July 2007 and June 2009 who developed AKI I and in whom advanced haemodynamic monitoring was initiated within 12 h of diagnosis of AKI I. We compared patients with a MPP above and below the median value in the first 12 h of diagnosis of AKI. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to identify independent risk factors for progression to AKI III, to explore the impact of MAP and CVP separately, and to investigate the impact of MPP in pre-defined sub-groups.ResultsAmong 2118 ICU patients, 790 patients (37%) developed AKI I of whom 205 underwent advanced haemodynamic monitoring within 12 h of AKI stage I. Their median MPP was 59 mmHg. AKI I patients with a MPP ≤59 mmHg had a significantly higher risk of progressing to AKI stage III (48.6% versus 34%, respectively; p = 0.0034). This association was stronger in patients with ischemic heart disease, congestive cardiac failure or without pre-existing hypertension and in patients with a MAP 1 h. As individual components, a raised CVP was independently associated with progression to AKI stage III but MAP alone was not an independent risk factor for AKI progression.ConclusionMPP <60 mmHg was independently associated with AKI progression. CVP was the key component of MPP.
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 28468613 · DOI · PMC5415805
Elevated central venous pressure is associated with increased mortality and acute kidney injury in critically ill patients: a meta-analysis [3]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- BackgroundThe association of central venous pressure (CVP) and mortality and acute kidney injury (AKI) in critically ill adult patients remains unclear.
- Closing excerpt
- Trial registrationPROSPERO, CRD42019126381.
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (225 words)
BackgroundThe association of central venous pressure (CVP) and mortality and acute kidney injury (AKI) in critically ill adult patients remains unclear. We performed a meta-analysis to determine whether elevated CVP is associated with increased mortality and AKI in critically ill adult patients.MethodsWe searched PubMed and Embase through June 2019 to identify studies that investigated the association between CVP and mortality and/or AKI in critically ill adult patients admitted into the intensive care unit. We calculated the summary odds ratio (OR) and 95% CI using a random-effects model.ResultsFifteen cohort studies with a broad spectrum of critically ill patients (mainly sepsis) were included. On a dichotomous scale, elevated CVP was associated with an increased risk of mortality (3 studies; 969 participants; OR, 1.65; 95% CI, 1.19-2.29) and AKI (2 studies; 689 participants; OR, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.39-3.14). On a continuous scale, higher CVP was associated with greater risk of mortality (5 studies; 7837 participants; OR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.03-1.17) and AKI (6 studies; 5446 participants; OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.06-1.23). Furthermore, per 1 mmHg increase in CVP increased the odds of AKI by 6% (4 studies; 5150 participants; OR, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.01-1.12). Further analyses restricted to patients with sepsis showed consistent results.ConclusionsElevated CVP is associated with an increased risk of mortality and AKI in critically ill adult patients admitted into the intensive care unit.Trial registrationPROSPERO, CRD42019126381.
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 32138764 · DOI · PMC7059303
Role of Central Venous Pressure and Mean Arterial Pressure to Central Venous Pressure Ratio in Assessing Poisoning Severity and Poor Outcomes in Intensive Care Unit-Admitted Acute Aluminum Phosphide-Poisoned Patients [4]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- Aluminum phosphide (ALP) is a highly toxic pesticide endangering the healthcare system.
- Closing excerpt
- Lower MAP/CVP ratios and higher CVP measurements are alarming signs, warranting a higher risk of the need for MV and in-hospital mortality in acute ALP poisoning.
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (252 words)
Aluminum phosphide (ALP) is a highly toxic pesticide endangering the healthcare system. Higher central venous pressure (CVP) values may be linked to poorer outcomes in various medical conditions. This study evaluated the role of CVP and mean arterial pressure (MAP)/CVP ratio as prognostic factors for intensive care unit (ICU) admitted acute ALP-poisoned patients. This retrospective study included 145 acutely ALP-poisoned patients who were referred to the ICU during two years. Data regarding history, clinical manifestations, laboratory investigations, and outcome were collected and stratified by quartiles (Q1-Q4) of the measured CVP during the first 6 h after admission. In-hospital mortality and need for mechanical ventilation (MV) were significantly predominant in Q3 and Q4 groups of CVP levels (89.4% and 92% & 91.5% and 96%, respectively) (p-values < 0.001). After vasopressors administration, survivors demonstrated a significant mean reduction in CVP measurements (-4.5 mmHg), whereas non-survivors had a mean increase (+ 0.6 mmHg) (p = 0.011). MAP/CVP ratio has good discriminatory power (the areas under the curve (AUCs) = 0.836 and 0.846) for predicting the need for MV and in-hospital mortality, respectively. The CVP measurement (AUCs = 0.812 and 0.782, respectively) comes in second, followed by the poisoning severity score (AUCs = 0.778 and 0.768, respectively). There was a significant decrease in survival probability in patients with CVP ≥ 25 mmHg, and MAP/CVP ratio ≤ 2.48 (p-values < 0.001). Lower MAP/CVP ratios and higher CVP measurements are alarming signs, warranting a higher risk of the need for MV and in-hospital mortality in acute ALP poisoning.
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 41831064 · DOI · PMC12988964
Key reviews and meta-analyses
The most cited review-type papers among PubMed’s best-match results for this heading, listed with bibliographic details only. Follow the links for the full text and access terms.
- Research article Does central venous pressure predict fluid responsiveness? A systematic review of the literature and the tale of seven mares [5]
- Research article The clinical use of HVPG measurements in chronic liver disease [6]
- Research article Does the central venous pressure predict fluid responsiveness? An updated meta-analysis and a plea for some common sense [7]
- Research article Venous function and central venous pressure: a physiologic story [8]
- Research article Systematic review including re-analyses of 1148 individual data sets of central venous pressure as a predictor of fluid responsiveness [9]
- Research article Central venous pressure: A useful but not so simple measurement [10]
References
- Ciozda W, Kedan I, Kehl DW, Zimmer R, Khandwalla R, Kimchi A. The efficacy of sonographic measurement of inferior vena cava diameter as an estimate of central venous pressure. . 2016. PMID 27542597 · DOI · PMC4992235
- Ostermann M, Hall A, Crichton S. Low mean perfusion pressure is a risk factor for progression of acute kidney injury in critically ill patients - A retrospective analysis. . 2017. PMID 28468613 · DOI · PMC5415805
- Chen CY, Zhou Y, Wang P, Qi EY, Gu WJ. Elevated central venous pressure is associated with increased mortality and acute kidney injury in critically ill patients: a meta-analysis. . 2020. PMID 32138764 · DOI · PMC7059303
- Lashin HI, Mahran MM, Adel B. Role of Central Venous Pressure and Mean Arterial Pressure to Central Venous Pressure Ratio in Assessing Poisoning Severity and Poor Outcomes in Intensive Care Unit-Admitted Acute Aluminum Phosphide-Poisoned Patients. . 2026. PMID 41831064 · DOI · PMC12988964
- Marik PE, Baram M, Vahid B. Does central venous pressure predict fluid responsiveness? A systematic review of the literature and the tale of seven mares. Chest. 2008. PMID 18628220 · DOI
- Bosch J, Abraldes JG, Berzigotti A, García-Pagan JC. The clinical use of HVPG measurements in chronic liver disease. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2009. PMID 19724251 · DOI
- Marik PE, Cavallazzi R. Does the central venous pressure predict fluid responsiveness? An updated meta-analysis and a plea for some common sense. Crit Care Med. 2013. PMID 23774337 · DOI
- Gelman S. Venous function and central venous pressure: a physiologic story. Anesthesiology. 2008. PMID 18362606 · DOI
- Eskesen TG, Wetterslev M, Perner A. Systematic review including re-analyses of 1148 individual data sets of central venous pressure as a predictor of fluid responsiveness. Intensive Care Med. 2016. PMID 26650057 · DOI
- Magder S. Central venous pressure: A useful but not so simple measurement. Crit Care Med. 2006. PMID 16763509 · DOI
About this article
- Sources
- NLM Medical Subject Headings (definition, synonyms); NCBI PubMed (counts, identifiers); Europe PMC (open-access abstracts and citation counts).
- Verification
- Every reference was resolved against PubMed on 2026-10-31; title, year and DOI matched.
- Review state
- automated source verified; no human expert review has been recorded yet.
- Version
- 1, last updated 2026-10-29.
See how EvidenceLib is built. Spotted an error? Email support@evidencehelix.com.
Evidence strength
EvidenceHelix's computed view of the study designs behind this topic: how common meta-analyses, randomized trials and reviews are, how recent the literature is, and a plain-language reading. It describes the design mix of the literature. It is not a quality appraisal of any study, and it is not medical advice.