PURPOSE: Pleural and abdominal pressure are clinically estimated by measuring the esophageal and bladder or intragastric pressure (IGP), respectively. A new nasogastric polyfunctional catheter is now commercially available, equipped with two balloons in the lower and distal part; this catheter allows simultaneous esophageal pressure (Pes) and IGP measurements and can be also used to feed the patient. We compared the Pes and IGP measured using this new device with those obtained with a standard balloon catheter taken as gold standard. METHODS: Twenty-four intubated patients requiring ventilator support (mean age 64.3 ± 16.8 years, body mass index 25.3 ± 3.0 kg/m(2), and PaO(2)/FiO(2) 280.8 ± 123.4 mmHg) were enrolled. Esophageal pressure and IGP were measured with the new nasogastric polyfunctional catheter (Nutrivent, Sidam, Italy) and with a standard balloon catheter (Smart Cath Viasys, USA). The Smart Cath was first inserted in the stomach and then retracted to the esophagus to measure IGP and Pes, respectively. In each patient two paired measurements were averaged. RESULTS: In the Bland-Altman analysis, the bias and agreement bands for Pes, ΔPes (computed as the difference of esophageal pressure between end-inspiration and expiration), and IGP were -0.25 (-2.65 to +2.15), 0.0 (-0.9 to +0.9), and -0.45 (-2.85 to + 1.95) cmH(2)O, respectively. No side effects or complications were recorded. CONCLUSIONS: The new polyfunctional catheter showed a clinically acceptable validity in recording esophageal and intragastric pressure. This device should help physicians to better individualize the clinical patient management.
PURPOSE: Pleural and abdominal pressure are clinically estimated by measuring the esophageal and bladder or intragastric pressure (IGP), respectively. A new nasogastric polyfunctional catheter is now commercially available, equipped with two balloons in the lower and distal part; this catheter allows simultaneous esophageal pressure (Pes) and IGP measurements and can be also used to feed the patient. We compared the Pes and IGP measured using this new device with those obtained with a standard balloon catheter taken as gold standard. METHODS: Twenty-four intubated patients requiring ventilator support (mean age 64.3 ± 16.8 years, body mass index 25.3 ± 3.0 kg/m(2), and PaO(2)/FiO(2) 280.8 ± 123.4 mmHg) were enrolled. Esophageal pressure and IGP were measured with the new nasogastric polyfunctional catheter (Nutrivent, Sidam, Italy) and with a standard balloon catheter (Smart Cath Viasys, USA). The Smart Cath was first inserted in the stomach and then retracted to the esophagus to measure IGP and Pes, respectively. In each patient two paired measurements were averaged. RESULTS: In the Bland-Altman analysis, the bias and agreement bands for Pes, ΔPes (computed as the difference of esophageal pressure between end-inspiration and expiration), and IGP were -0.25 (-2.65 to +2.15), 0.0 (-0.9 to +0.9), and -0.45 (-2.85 to + 1.95) cmH(2)O, respectively. No side effects or complications were recorded. CONCLUSIONS: The new polyfunctional catheter showed a clinically acceptable validity in recording esophageal and intragastric pressure. This device should help physicians to better individualize the clinical patient management.
Authors: P Pelosi; M Goldner; A McKibben; A Adams; G Eccher; P Caironi; S Losappio; L Gattinoni; J J Marini Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2001-07-01 Impact factor: 21.405
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: Manu L N G Malbrain; Davide Chiumello; Paolo Pelosi; David Bihari; Richard Innes; V Marco Ranieri; Monica Del Turco; Alexander Wilmer; Nicola Brienza; Vincenzo Malcangi; Jonathan Cohen; Andre Japiassu; Bart L De Keulenaer; Ronny Daelemans; Luc Jacquet; Pierre-François Laterre; Günther Frank; Paulo de Souza; Bruno Cesana; Luciano Gattinoni Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2005-02 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Manu L N G Malbrain; Davide Chiumello; Paolo Pelosi; Alexander Wilmer; Nicola Brienza; Vincenzo Malcangi; David Bihari; Richard Innes; Jonathan Cohen; Pierre Singer; Andre Japiassu; Elizabeth Kurtop; Bart L De Keulenaer; Ronny Daelemans; Monica Del Turco; P Cosimini; Marco Ranieri; Luc Jacquet; Pierre-François Laterre; Luciano Gattinoni Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2004-02-03 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Davide Chiumello; Antonella Marino; Matteo Brioni; Federica Menga; Irene Cigada; Marco Lazzerini; Maria C Andrisani; Pietro Biondetti; Bruno Cesana; Luciano Gattinoni Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2012-09-19 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Massimo Antonelli; Marc Bonten; Jean Chastre; Giuseppe Citerio; Giorgio Conti; J Randall Curtis; Daniel De Backer; Goran Hedenstierna; Michael Joannidis; Duncan Macrae; Jordi Mancebo; Salvatore M Maggiore; Alexandre Mebazaa; Jean-Charles Preiser; Patricia Rocco; Jean-François Timsit; Jan Wernerman; Haibo Zhang Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2012-02-14 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Han Chen; Yan-Lin Yang; Ming Xu; Zhong-Hua Shi; Xuan He; Xiu-Mei Sun; Xu-Ying Luo; Guang-Qiang Chen; Jian-Xin Zhou Journal: J Int Med Res Date: 2017-01-17 Impact factor: 1.671
Authors: David Berger; Olivier Wigger; Stefano de Marchi; Martin R Grübler; Andreas Bloch; Reto Kurmann; Odile Stalder; Kaspar Felix Bachmann; Stefan Bloechlinger Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2022-04-06 Impact factor: 6.138