OBJECTIVE: Intravesical pressure measurement is considered to be the gold standard for the assessment of intra-abdominal pressure. However, this method is indirect and depends on a physiologic bladder function. We evaluated a modified piezoresistive technique and a water-capsule technique for direct and continuous intra-abdominal pressure measurement. DESIGN: Experimental study. SETTING: Animal research laboratory. SUBJECTS: Eleven male domestic pigs. INTERVENTIONS: In anesthetized and mechanically ventilated animals, CO2 was insufflated to stepwise increase the intra-abdominal pressure to 30 mm Hg. Pressure was then held constant for 9 hrs followed by decompression. Piezoresistive measurement and water-capsule measurement probes were placed intra-abdominally. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Readings of intravesical pressure measurement, piezoresistive measurement, and water-capsule measurement were taken hourly. Mean difference to insufflator readings, confidence intervals, and limits of agreement were calculated. Differences between applied pressure and intra-abdominal pressure readings were assessed using a two-factor analysis of variance. No significant differences between methods could be observed. During stepwise pressure increase, limits of agreements were -3.6 to 3.6 mm Hg. Confidence intervals were -3.4 to 3.5 (intravesical pressure measurement), -1.6 to 1.5 (piezoresistive measurement), and 0.5 to 2.9 mm Hg (water-capsule measurement). In the presence of constantly elevated intra-abdominal pressure, limits of agreement ranged from -8.2 to +8.2 mm Hg. Confidence intervals were -0.4 to 6.2 (intravesical pressure measurement), -0.2 to 2.7 (piezoresistive measurement), and 1.1 to 5.1 mm Hg (water-capsule measurement). CONCLUSIONS: Both piezoresistive measurement and water-capsule measurement had smaller confidence intervals than intravesical pressure measurement, indicating higher precision, whereas water-capsule measurement had a significant offset. Piezoresistive measurement could be the most suitable device for continuous direct intra-abdominal pressure monitoring in specific patients.
OBJECTIVE: Intravesical pressure measurement is considered to be the gold standard for the assessment of intra-abdominal pressure. However, this method is indirect and depends on a physiologic bladder function. We evaluated a modified piezoresistive technique and a water-capsule technique for direct and continuous intra-abdominal pressure measurement. DESIGN: Experimental study. SETTING: Animal research laboratory. SUBJECTS: Eleven male domestic pigs. INTERVENTIONS: In anesthetized and mechanically ventilated animals, CO2 was insufflated to stepwise increase the intra-abdominal pressure to 30 mm Hg. Pressure was then held constant for 9 hrs followed by decompression. Piezoresistive measurement and water-capsule measurement probes were placed intra-abdominally. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Readings of intravesical pressure measurement, piezoresistive measurement, and water-capsule measurement were taken hourly. Mean difference to insufflator readings, confidence intervals, and limits of agreement were calculated. Differences between applied pressure and intra-abdominal pressure readings were assessed using a two-factor analysis of variance. No significant differences between methods could be observed. During stepwise pressure increase, limits of agreements were -3.6 to 3.6 mm Hg. Confidence intervals were -3.4 to 3.5 (intravesical pressure measurement), -1.6 to 1.5 (piezoresistive measurement), and 0.5 to 2.9 mm Hg (water-capsule measurement). In the presence of constantly elevated intra-abdominal pressure, limits of agreement ranged from -8.2 to +8.2 mm Hg. Confidence intervals were -0.4 to 6.2 (intravesical pressure measurement), -0.2 to 2.7 (piezoresistive measurement), and 1.1 to 5.1 mm Hg (water-capsule measurement). CONCLUSIONS: Both piezoresistive measurement and water-capsule measurement had smaller confidence intervals than intravesical pressure measurement, indicating higher precision, whereas water-capsule measurement had a significant offset. Piezoresistive measurement could be the most suitable device for continuous direct intra-abdominal pressure monitoring in specific patients.
Authors: Manu L N G Malbrain; Michael L Cheatham; Andrew Kirkpatrick; Michael Sugrue; Michael Parr; Jan De Waele; Zsolt Balogh; Ari Leppäniemi; Claudia Olvera; Rao Ivatury; Scott D'Amours; Julia Wendon; Ken Hillman; Kenth Johansson; Karel Kolkman; Alexander Wilmer Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2006-09-12 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Adrian B Cresswell; Wayel Jassem; Parthi Srinivasan; Andreas A Prachalias; Elizabeth Sizer; William Burnal; Georg Auzinger; Paolo Muiesan; Mohammed Rela; Nigel D Heaton; Matthew J Bowles; Julia A Wendon Journal: Ann Intensive Care Date: 2012-07-05 Impact factor: 6.925
Authors: Manu L N G Malbrain; Inneke De laet; Dries Viaene; Karen Schoonheydt; Hilde Dits Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2007-12-13 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Joost Wauters; Liesbeth Spincemaille; Anne-Sophie Dieudonne; Kenny Van Zwam; Alexander Wilmer; Manu L N G Malbrain Journal: Crit Care Res Pract Date: 2012-02-20