PURPOSE: To describe what is defined as normal intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) and how body positioning, body mass index (BMI) and positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) affect IAP monitoring. METHODS: A review of different databases was made (Pubmed, MEDLINE (January 1966-June 2007) and EMBASE.com (January 1966-June 2007)) using the search terms of "IAP", "intra-abdominal hypertension" (IAH), "abdominal compartment syndrome" (ACS), "body positioning", "prone positioning", "PEEP" and "acute respiratory distress syndrome" (ARDS). Prior to 1966, we selected older articles by looking at the reference lists displayed in the more recent papers. RESULTS: This review focuses on the concept that the abdomen truly behaves as a hydraulic system. The definitions of a normal IAP in the general patient population and morbidly obese patients are reviewed. Subsequently, factors that affect the accuracy of IAP monitoring, i.e., body position (head of bed elevation, lateral decubitus and prone position) and PEEP, are explored. CONCLUSION: The abdomen behaves as a hydraulic system with a normal IAP of about 5-7 mmHg, and with higher baseline levels in morbidly obese patients of about 9-14 mmHg. Measuring IAP via the bladder in the supine position is still the accepted standard method, but in patients in the semi-recumbent position (head of the bed elevated to 30 degrees and 45 degrees ), the IAP on average is 4 and 9 mmHg, respectively, higher. Future research should be focused on developing and validating predictive equations to correct for supine IAP towards the semi-recumbent position. Small increases in IAP in stable patients without IAH, turned prone, have no detrimental effects. The role of prone positioning in the unstable patient with or without IAH still needs to be established.
PURPOSE: To describe what is defined as normal intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) and how body positioning, body mass index (BMI) and positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) affect IAP monitoring. METHODS: A review of different databases was made (Pubmed, MEDLINE (January 1966-June 2007) and EMBASE.com (January 1966-June 2007)) using the search terms of "IAP", "intra-abdominal hypertension" (IAH), "abdominal compartment syndrome" (ACS), "body positioning", "prone positioning", "PEEP" and "acute respiratory distress syndrome" (ARDS). Prior to 1966, we selected older articles by looking at the reference lists displayed in the more recent papers. RESULTS: This review focuses on the concept that the abdomen truly behaves as a hydraulic system. The definitions of a normal IAP in the general patient population and morbidly obesepatients are reviewed. Subsequently, factors that affect the accuracy of IAP monitoring, i.e., body position (head of bed elevation, lateral decubitus and prone position) and PEEP, are explored. CONCLUSION: The abdomen behaves as a hydraulic system with a normal IAP of about 5-7 mmHg, and with higher baseline levels in morbidly obesepatients of about 9-14 mmHg. Measuring IAP via the bladder in the supine position is still the accepted standard method, but in patients in the semi-recumbent position (head of the bed elevated to 30 degrees and 45 degrees ), the IAP on average is 4 and 9 mmHg, respectively, higher. Future research should be focused on developing and validating predictive equations to correct for supine IAP towards the semi-recumbent position. Small increases in IAP in stable patients without IAH, turned prone, have no detrimental effects. The role of prone positioning in the unstable patient with or without IAH still needs to be established.
Authors: E J Hazebroek; J J Haitsma; B Lachmann; E W Steyerberg; R W F de Bruin; N D Bouvy; H J Bonjer Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2002-04-09 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: T Bein; M Bischoff; U Brückner; K Gebhardt; D Henzler; C Hermes; K Lewandowski; M Max; M Nothacker; T Staudinger; M Tryba; S Weber-Carstens; H Wrigge Journal: Anaesthesist Date: 2015-08 Impact factor: 1.041
Authors: Stephen H Loring; Carl R O'Donnell; Negin Behazin; Atul Malhotra; Todd Sarge; Ray Ritz; Victor Novack; Daniel Talmor Journal: J Appl Physiol (1985) Date: 2009-12-17
Authors: Stephan M Jakob; Rafael Knuesel; Jyrki J Tenhunen; Richard Pradl; Jukka Takala Journal: BMC Gastroenterol Date: 2010-07-04 Impact factor: 3.067
Authors: Andrew W Kirkpatrick; Paolo Pelosi; Jan J De Waele; Manu Lng Malbrain; Chad G Ball; Maureen O Meade; Henry T Stelfox; Kevin B Laupland Journal: Crit Care Date: 2010-08-27 Impact factor: 9.097
Authors: Massimo Antonelli; Elie Azoulay; Marc Bonten; Jean Chastre; Giuseppe Citerio; Giorgio Conti; Daniel De Backer; François Lemaire; Herwig Gerlach; Goran Hedenstierna; Michael Joannidis; Duncan Macrae; Jordi Mancebo; Salvatore M Maggiore; Alexandre Mebazaa; Jean-Charles Preiser; Jerôme Pugin; Jan Wernerman; Haibo Zhang Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2010-02-23 Impact factor: 17.440