The evaluation of the effect of body positioning on intra-abdominal pressure measurement and the effect of intra-abdominal pressure at different body positioning on organ function and prognosis in critically ill patients.

PURPOSE: Current literatures confirmed the widespread and frequent development of both intra-abdominal hypertension (IAH) and abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS) among the critically ill with a significant associated risk of organ failure and increased mortality. The 2004 International ACS Consensus Conference committee proposed that intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) be measured in complete supine position; however, the supine position of intensive care unit (ICU) patients (<30° of bed increase) presented a significant risk for ventilator-associated pneumonia. Therefore, the potential contribution of head of bed (HOB) position in elevating IAP should be considered. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of body positioning on IAP measurement and the effect of IAP at different body positions on organ function and prognosis in critically ill patients.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective cohort study to investigate the effect of different patient positioning on IAP, organ function, and prognosis was conducted on 88 patients admitted to a medical-surgical ICU. On admission, patients' epidemiological data and risk factors for IAH were studied; daily mean IAPs, abdominal perfusion pressure, filtration gradient, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score, sequential organ failure assessment score, and multiple organ dysfunction scores were registered; next, conventional hemodynamic variables, intrathoracic blood volume index, global end-diastolic volume index and extravascular lung water using the pulse contour cardiac output system were recorded. Intra-abdominal pressures were recorded through a bladder catheter every 4 hours on the first day. Intra-abdominal pressure was measured with the patient HOB increases from 0° to 45°. Mean arterial pressure was recorded simultaneously, whereas abdominal perfusion pressure and filtration gradient (FG) were also calculated simultaneously.
RESULTS: The main results of this study were the incidence of IAH (28.4%) and ACS (2.3%) in ICU patients; the significant and independent relationship between IAP and HOB increases. Considering the absolute numbers of IAP, the HOB of 10° and 20° showed slight differences, whereas that of 30° and 45° showed clinically significant differences; HOB elevation was associated with clinically significant decreases in abdominal perfusion pressure and FG; patients with IAH were prone to the development of shock and multiple organ dysfunction syndrome and exhibited significantly lower intrathoracic blood volume index and global end-diastolic volume index and higher extravascular lung water.
CONCLUSIONS: There is a significant and independent relationship between IAP and HOB positioning in critically ill patients, with the HOB of 30° and 45° showing significant difference. Abdominal perfusion pressure and FG are significantly decreased when the patient's HOB is elevated. The potential contribution of body position in elevating IAP should be considered in critically ill patients with the risk of IAH and ACS.