Articles

Correlation between different methods of intra-abdominal pressure monitoring in varying intra-abdominal hypertension models

R D Wise, R N Rodseth, L Correa-Martin, F M Sanchez Margallo, P Becker, G Castellanos, M L N Malbrain

Abstract


Background. Advances in intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) measurement have enabled better monitoring and physiological manipulation of patients with intra-abdominal hypertension or abdominal compartment syndrome. This study aimed to determine the correlation between transvesical (TV), transgastric (TG) and direct transperitoneal (TP) IAP monitoring at different IAPs in porcine models.

Objectives. To assess the statistical agreement between TV, TG and TP pressure monitoring in a pneumoperitoneum and an intestinal obstruction intra-abdominal hypertension model at different IAPs.

Methods. Fifty-nine pigs were divided into six groups: a control group (Cr; n=5), three pneumoperitoneum groups at pressures of 20 mmHg, 30 mmHg, and 40 mmHg (Pn20, Pn30, Pn40; n=40), and two intestinal-occlusion groups at pressures of 20 mmHg and 30 mmHg (Oc20, Oc30; n=14). IAP was simultaneously measured in each pig using the three methods at different times. The control group did not have any intervention to increase the IAP. Intra-class correlation was used to assess agreement between the methods.

Results. At pressures >20 mmHg, all three methods showed good correlation with each other (Pn20=0.87; Pn30=0.96; Pn40=0.88; Oc20=0.69; Oc30=0.86). Correlation between TP and TG (Cr=0.0; Pn20=0.85; Pn30=0.94; Pn40=0.90; Oc20=0.78; Oc30=0.78); TP and TV (Cr=0.0; Pn20=0.83; Pn30=0.95; Pn40=0.86; Oc20=0.59; Oc30=0.88); and importantly between TV and TG (Cr=0.0; Pn20=0.95; Pn30=0.98; Pn40=0.88; Oc20=0.69; Oc30=0.91) was good.

Conclusion. All three measurement methods showed good correlation at pressures >20 mmHg and were unaffected by the type of IAP model. These results suggest that either transvesical or transgastric pressure measurements can be used for IAP measurement when TP pressures are >20 mmHg.


Authors' affiliations

R D Wise, Pietermaritzburg Metropolitan Department of Anaesthetics, Critical Care and Pain Management, Pietermaritzburg, South Africa, and Discipline of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care, School of Clinical Medicine, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa

R N Rodseth, Pietermaritzburg Metropolitan Department of Anaesthetics, Critical Care and Pain Management, Pietermaritzburg, South Africa, and Discipline of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care, School of Clinical Medicine, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa

L Correa-Martin, Laparoscopy and Anaesthesiology Research Department, Jesús Usón Minimally Invasive Surgery Centre, Cacères, Spain

F M Sanchez Margallo, Laparoscopy and Anaesthesiology Research Department, Jesús Usón Minimally Invasive Surgery Centre, Cacères, Spain

P Becker, Department of Statistics, University of Pretoria, South Africa

G Castellanos, Department of Surgery, Virgen de la Arrixaca University Hospital, Murcia, Spain

M L N Malbrain, Medical and Surgical ICU and High Care Burn Unit, Ziekenhuis Netwerk Antwerpen, Antwerpen, Belgium

Full Text

PDF (210KB)

Keywords

Intra-abdominal pressure; monitor; abdominal compartment syndrome; transgastric pressure

Cite this article

Southern African Journal of Critical Care 2017;33(1):15-18. DOI:10.7196/327

Article History

Date submitted: 2017-03-16
Date published: 2017-07-11

Article Views

Abstract views: 2016
Full text views: 985

Comments on this article

*Read our policy for posting comments here