| Literature DB >> 22454767 |
Joost Wauters1, Piet Claus, Nathalie Brosens, Myles McLaughlin, Greet Hermans, Manu Malbrain, Alexander Wilmer.
Abstract
Rationale. Elevated intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) may compromise respiratory and cardiovascular function by abdomino-thoracic pressure transmission. We aimed (1) to study the effects of elevated IAP on pleural pressure, (2) to understand the implications for lung and chest wall compliances and (3) to determine whether volumetric filling parameters may be more accurate than classical pressure-based filling pressures for preload assessment in the setting of elevated IAP. Methods. In eleven pigs, IAP was increased stepwise from 6 to 30 mmHg. Hemodynamic, esophageal, and pulmonary pressures were recorded. Results. 17% (end-expiratory) to 62% (end-inspiratory) of elevated IAP was transmitted to the thoracic compartment. Respiratory system compliance decreased significantly with elevated IAP and chest wall compliance decreased. Central venous and pulmonary wedge pressure increased with increasing IAP and correlated inversely (r = -0.31) with stroke index (SI). Global end-diastolic volume index was unaffected by IAP and correlated best with SI (r = 0.52). Conclusions. Increased IAP is transferred to the thoracic compartment and results in a decreased respiratory system compliance due to decreased chest wall compliance. Volumetric filling parameters and transmural filling pressures are clearly superior to classical cardiac filling pressures in the assessment of cardiac preload during elevated IAP.Entities:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22454767 PMCID: PMC3290811 DOI: 10.1155/2012/763181
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Crit Care Res Pract ISSN: 2090-1305
Figure 1Effect of increasing intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) on end-expiratory esophageal pressure (eePeso) and end-inspiratory esophageal pressure (eiPeso). Baseline = 6 mmHg, release = 5 mmHg. Data are expressed as mean ± SEM. *P = 0.04 versus baseline, † P = 0.04 versus IAP = 30.
Figure 2Effect of increasing intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) on respiratory system compliance (Crs), chest wall compliance (Ccw), and lung compliance (Clung). Baseline = 6 mmHg, release = 5 mmHg. Data are expressed as mean ± SEM. *P = 0.04 versus baseline, † P = 0.04 versus IAP = 30.
Effect of increasing intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) on pulmonary mechanics, pulmonary function, and global hemodynamics. Pplat plateau airway pressure, PIP peak inspiratory pressure, EVLWI extravascular lung water index, HR heart rate, MAP mean arterial pressure, MPAP mean pulmonary arterial pressure, SI stroke index, SVRI systemic vascular resistance index, and GEDVI global end-diastolic volume index. Data are expressed as mean ± SEM.
| IAP (mmHg) | Baseline | 10 | 20 | 30 | Release |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||
| Pplat (cmH2O) | 16 ± 2 | 17 ± 2 | 24 ± 2* | 32 ± 2* | 19 ± 2∗,† |
| PIP (cmH2O) | 19 ± 1 | 20 ± 2 | 27 ± 2* | 34 ± 2* | 21 ± 2† |
| EVLWI (mL/kg) | 13 ± 2 | 14 ± 2 | 15 ± 2 | 14 ± 3 | 14 ± 2 |
| paO2/fiO2 (mmHg) | 487 ± 13 | 467 ± 14 | 487 ± 12 | 394 ± 15 | 376 ± 15 |
| paCO2 (mmHg) | 39 ± 2 | 34 ± 2 | 38 ± 2 | 38 ± 1 | 39 ± 1 |
|
| |||||
|
| |||||
| HR (bpm) | 92 ± 5 | 97 ± 4 | 92 ± 4 | 93 ± 4 | 92 ± 4 |
| MAP (mmHg) | 93 ± 4 | 91 ± 5 | 98 ± 5 | 104 ± 5* | 98 ± 5 |
| MPAP (mmHg) | 26 ± 2 | 27 ± 2 | 31 ± 3* | 37 ± 5* | 34 ± 2∗,† |
| SI (mL/kg) | 1.2 ± 0.5 | 1.3 ± 0.5* | 1.2 ± 0.5 | 1.0 ± 0.5‡ | 1.2 ± 0.5† |
| SVRI (dynes·s/cm5·kg) | 35 ± 4 | 28 ± 4* | 34 ± 5 | 41 ± 5‡ | 34 ± 5† |
| GEDVI (mL/kg) | 15.5 ± 1.9 | 17.0 ± 3.1 | 16.6 ± 3.0 | 14.9 ± 2.7 | 17 ± 3.7 |
For pulmonary data: *P = 0.025 versus baseline, † P = 0.015 versus IAP = 30.
For hemodynamic data: *P = 0.04 versus baseline, † P = 0.05 versus IAP = 30, ‡ P = 0.05 versus IAP = 10. All data without symbols indicate a P value of >0.05.
Figure 3Effect of increasing intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) on central venous pressure (CVP), end-expiratory pulmonary artery occlusion pressure (PAOP) and transmural filling pressures (tCVP and tPAOP). Baseline = 6 mmHg, release = 5 mmHg. Data are expressed as mean ± SEM. *P = 0.04 versus baseline, † P = 0.05 versus IAP = 30.