Skip to main content
MedVellum
QuestionsVideosPricing

MedVellum

Fellowship exam preparation across every specialty: source-verified topics, questions in every format, and videos.

Product

  • Specialties
  • Questions
  • Videos
  • Exam tools
  • Pricing

Verification & policy

  • Verified register
  • Editorial policy
  • Privacy
  • Terms

Account

  • Sign in
  • Create account
  • Dashboard
  • Account & billing

© 2026 MedVellum. For education only — not a substitute for clinical judgement.

llms.txtPsychiatry LLM catalogSitemap

ICU TopicsResuscitation & shock

ICU · Resuscitation & shock

Fluid Responsiveness — Static & Dynamic Indices, Passive Leg Raise, SVV/PPV & Fluid Challenge

Also known as Fluid responsiveness · Passive leg raise · PLR · Stroke volume variation · SVV · Pulse pressure variation · PPV · Fluid challenge · Dynamic indices · End-expiratory occlusion test · EEOT · IVC distensibility

Fluid responsiveness is the prediction of whether a patient will increase stroke volume (or cardiac output) by around 10 per cent in response to a fluid bolus — and only about half of ICU patients actually do. Static markers (CVP, PAOP) do NOT predict it; the curve is flat. Dynamic markers do: the passive leg raise (PLR) is the reference reversible self-test, valid in spontaneous breathing (a rise in CO, SV or LVOT VTI of at least 10 per cent is positive). Pulse pressure variation (PPV) above 12.5 per cent and stroke volume variation (SVV) above 11.6 per cent apply only in controlled mechanical ventilation with no spontaneous breathing and a tidal volume of at least 8 mL/kg. Fluid overload worsens outcome — the CLASSIC, FACTT and CLOVERS trials support a restrictive strategy once the patient is no longer responsive.

medium14 referencesUpdated 20 Aug 202614 min readVerification in progress

Practise this topic

  • 8 MCQs

Your progress

Saved on this device.

Practise this topic8 MCQs with explanations

Target exams

CICMFFICMEDIC

Red flags

  • Only about 50 per cent of ICU patients are fluid responsive — never give a fluid bolus blindly.
  • Central venous pressure (CVP) does NOT predict fluid responsiveness — a flat curve in Marik's meta-analysis of 24 studies; a low CVP does not guarantee and a high CVP does not exclude responsiveness.
  • PPV and SVV are INVALID unless two conditions hold: controlled mechanical ventilation with NO spontaneous breathing AND a tidal volume of at least 8 mL/kg (use the passive leg raise in spontaneous breathing).
  • Fluid overload worsens outcome — more days of ventilation, more AKI, higher mortality (FACTT, CLASSIC, CLOVERS). Stop fluids once the patient is no longer responsive.
  • The passive leg raise starts semi-recumbent at 45 degrees, NOT supine — starting supine misses the splanchnic reservoir; measure the response with a real-time cardiac output monitor (echo VTI or arterial waveform).
On this page
Study tools

Your progress

Saved on this device.

Practise this topic8 MCQs with explanations

Target exams

CICMFFICMEDIC

Red flags

  • Only about 50 per cent of ICU patients are fluid responsive — never give a fluid bolus blindly.
  • Central venous pressure (CVP) does NOT predict fluid responsiveness — a flat curve in Marik's meta-analysis of 24 studies; a low CVP does not guarantee and a high CVP does not exclude responsiveness.
  • PPV and SVV are INVALID unless two conditions hold: controlled mechanical ventilation with NO spontaneous breathing AND a tidal volume of at least 8 mL/kg (use the passive leg raise in spontaneous breathing).
  • Fluid overload worsens outcome — more days of ventilation, more AKI, higher mortality (FACTT, CLASSIC, CLOVERS). Stop fluids once the patient is no longer responsive.
  • The passive leg raise starts semi-recumbent at 45 degrees, NOT supine — starting supine misses the splanchnic reservoir; measure the response with a real-time cardiac output monitor (echo VTI or arterial waveform).
In one line

Fluid responsiveness is the prediction of whether a patient will increase stroke volume (or cardiac output) by around 10 per cent in response to a fluid bolus — and only about half of ICU patients actually do. Static markers (CVP, PAOP) do not predict it. Dynamic markers do: the passive leg raise (PLR) is the reference test — a reversible self-test, valid in spontaneous breathing (a rise in CO, SV or LVOT VTI of at least 10 ± 2 per cent is positive). Pulse pressure variation (PPV) above 12.5 per cent and stroke volume variation (SVV) above 11.6 per cent (pooled mean thresholds, Marik 2009) apply only in controlled ventilation with no spontaneous breathing and a tidal volume of at least 8 mL/kg. Give a fluid bolus only if responsive…

[1] [2] [4] [9] [11]

Meet the patient

A 68-year-old man in septic shock from community-acquired pneumonia has received 30 mL/kg of crystalloid. He is intubated, ventilated at 6 mL/kg predicted body weight, in sinus rhythm, MAP 63, lactate 3.2. The registrar wants to give another 500 mL bolus. Should they?[1]

The honest answer is: you do not know until you test. Only about half of ICU patients actually respond to a bolus, and this patient is on low tidal volumes — which means PPV and SVV are unreliable. The right move is a passive leg raise with a real-time cardiac output measurement. If the LVOT VTI rises by at least 10 per cent, give the fluid. If it does not, reach for noradrenaline, not saline.[9][11][2]

ICU Fellowship (CICM) Pro

Continue reading

You have read the opening of this topic. The complete unit — every section and its primary-source references — is part of the ICU Fellowship (CICM) fellowship library.

Sign in to continueSee pricing
References14ShowHide
  1. [1]Monnet X, Marik PE, Teboul JL. Prediction of fluid responsiveness: an update Ann Intensive Care, 2016.PMID 27858374
  2. [2]Monnet X, Marik P, Teboul JL. Passive leg raising for predicting fluid responsiveness: a systematic review and meta-analysis Intensive Care Med, 2016.PMID 26825952
  3. [3]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
  4. [4]Marik PE, Cavallazzi R, Vasu T, Hirani A. Dynamic changes in arterial waveform derived variables and fluid responsiveness in mechanically ventilated patients: a systematic review of the literature Crit Care Med, 2009.PMID 19602972
  5. [5]Meyhoff TS, Hjortrup PB, Wetterslev J, et al. Restriction of Intravenous Fluid in ICU Patients with Septic Shock N Engl J Med, 2022.PMID 35709019
  6. [6]Wiedemann HP, Wheeler AP, Bernard GR, et al. Comparison of two fluid-management strategies in acute lung injury N Engl J Med, 2006.PMID 16714767
  7. [7]Shapiro NI, Douglas IS, Brower RG, et al. Early Restrictive or Liberal Fluid Management for Sepsis-Induced Hypotension N Engl J Med, 2023.PMID 36688507
  8. [8]Cecconi M, Hofer C, Teboul JL, et al. Fluid challenges in intensive care: the FENICE study: A global inception cohort study Intensive Care Med, 2015.PMID 26162676
  9. [9]Orso D, Paoli I, Piani T, et al. Accuracy of Ultrasonographic Measurements of Inferior Vena Cava to Determine Fluid Responsiveness: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis J Intensive Care Med, 2020.PMID 29343170
  10. [10]Monnet X, Osman D, Ridel C, et al. Predicting volume responsiveness by using the end-expiratory occlusion in mechanically ventilated intensive care unit patients Crit Care Med, 2009.PMID 19237902
  11. [11]De Backer D, Heenen S, Piagnerelli M, Koch M, Vincent JL. Pulse pressure variations to predict fluid responsiveness: influence of tidal volume Intensive Care Med, 2005.PMID 15754196
  12. [12]Muller L, Louart G, Bousquet PJ, et al. An increase in aortic blood flow after an infusion of 100 ml colloid over 1 minute can predict fluid responsiveness: the mini-fluid challenge study Anesthesiology, 2011.PMID 21792056
  13. [13]Jabot J, Teboul JL, Richard C, Monnet X. Passive leg raising for predicting fluid responsiveness: importance of the postural change Intensive Care Med, 2009.PMID 18795254
  14. [14]Biais M, Vidil L, Sarrabay P, et al. Changes in stroke volume induced by passive leg raising in spontaneously breathing patients: comparison between echocardiography and Vigileo/FloTrac device Crit Care, 2009.PMID 19968880

Test yourself

Practise what you just read

  • 8 MCQs
ICU Fellowship (CICM) Pro

$29/ monthor $279 / year

The complete ICU Fellowship (CICM) library, every exam format, one subscription.

  • Complete library for one chosen specialty
  • Timed MCQ mock exams and spaced review
  • Clinical cases & cross-table vivas
See pricingSign in
PreviousEndpoints of Resuscitation — Lactate, ScvO2, Mottling, Urine, Capillary RefillResuscitation & shockNextFluid Resuscitation — Crystalloid vs Colloid, Balanced vs Saline, SOSD/ROSE & Fluid OverloadResuscitation & shock